User talk:Johnmizzi

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. —— Eagle 101 ^{(Need help?)} 07:48, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. Can't sleep, clown will eat me 07:57, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please discontinue from adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. You get four warnings then blocked. -- Stbalbach 14:23, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Johnmizzi, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Sarah Ewart 17:46, 15 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Academic Challenger 08:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, as I have told you, adding links to your own website is against external links guidelines and you will most likely end up being blocked again for spamming if you continue editing in this way. Sarah Ewart 23:09, 18 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

That's right. I got your message, and I am sure that having these books available for cell phones is a great service. Personally I cannot use it because I am visually impaired and I cannot yet use my cell phone to read anything because the technology for that is not there. However, the reason I removed the links was because of the spam policy. If other editors decide that it does not violate the spam policy, I will not keep removing them. Academic Challenger 23:11, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Image tagging for Image:Johnmizzi.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading Image:Johnmizzi.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the source and creator of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the source and creator of the image on the image's description page, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided source information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. 08:43, 19 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

External links[edit]

John, I think you've got a great service there and it is admirable that you provide it free of charge. I understand that the Google ads are necessary to provide some form of funding. With the amount of books you make available you have to have some way to pay for bandwidth, servers and other overhead costs. Very few sites could afford to provide such a service funded solely by user contributions or by a philanthropist. Still, the ads are one of the red flags that will probably prevent multiple links being added to Wikipedia. The problem with adding links to the service from Wikipedia comes from our policy on spam. Many people try to use Wikipedia to promote their product or service and we have had to develop a policy regarding external links to prevent abuse of the system. Unfortunately this sometimes prohibits otherwise viable links. Also, some people create Made For AdSense websites and promote them solely for the purpose of generating revenue from the ads. They generally provide something (information, online games, etc.) for free, but the main purpose of the site is commercial. Granted, a lot of legitimate websites use such ads to help cover operating costs, but such ads set off "spam radar" because of the actions of the spammers. Are you starting to see our problem here? Assuming that you have the best intentions in the world, we still have to ask ourselves "How is this materially different from intentional spam?" The simple answer is "It isn't." The intentions may be good, but the effect is the same. Even if your site didn't have prominent ads, thousands of links would still be considered spam. Again, not questioning your intentions (I'm assuming good faith), but pointing out known tactics of intentional spammers: Some spammers include links without caring if anyone ever clicks on them. As long as Google scans that page and notices the link, then the spammer's page rank increases, and a high page rank will bring more traffic than the individual links themselves ever would. Frequently spammers don't care if anyone ever clicks the link, just so long as Google sees it and adjusts the spammer's page rank accordingly. That is why even linking from talk pages isn't an option. If you linked to your site from thousands of article talk pages (which are recognized by Google), then we would have to let everyone link from the talk page if they wanted. Our article talk pages would become a spammer's paradise. To sum all this up, I think you've got a great service, but adding a lot of links to it from Wikipedia will almost certainly be viewed as spam by most members of the community. It isn't that we don't like your site or have anything against you. It is just that our policy on external links must be applied impartially. I'm sorry. You may want to consider providing a link to your site from the most-relevant article, maybe Project Gutenberg. SWAdair | Talk 05:18, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly think you guys are being irrational. I understand the spamming problem but in this case each link is providing something very useful and unique to Wikipedians. I am providing something that none has yet done and after all it is for FREE. I think maybe you guys are not reading my messages or else you guys are being so arrogant that you see nothing else. For each link Wikipedians can download ebooks to their cheap mobile phones. All you guys have as links are repeated external links providing ebooks in HTML where users have to sit down stuck to their machine or else printing them on tons of paper. Johnmizzi 07:33, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, please assume good faith here. Suggesting that the administrators who have tried to help you are "so arrogant" and "irrational" is completely unacceptable. The bottom line is you cannot spam thousands of links to our articles. You're just going to have to accept that. Sarah Ewart 09:44, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah I accept that. Can I add some links per day? Johnmizzi 11:58, 20 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, I cannot support you doing that. I think the number of administrative and spam warnings you've received here is indicative of the fact that there is currently no support for you adding your site. You've been told many times now by many people that you have a conflict of interest and that what you are doing is against external link guidelines. If you continue, your site will end up on the meta spam list and you will be blocked again. You just can't add thousands of links to your site, whether it is all at once or two a day, and you really need to stop. Sarah Ewart 20:14, 21 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah I only added 3 links, one for Charles Dickens, Mark Twain and Jules Verne. Only one per day. In terms of warnings I only had one so honestly I do not understand your comment. In these pages there are great links which are offerring a free service with some ads so I am not sure why mine is being discriminated against. I am offering the full versions not just previews. Thanks Johnmizzi 13:27, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Johnmizzi, it appears the Project Gutenberg site has these texts available in Plucker format (mobile phones, PDA's etc). For exmaple A Christmas Carol. Also your site has advertising (I think, I have an add-blocker but see lots of blocked text), and the Project Gutenberg site is add-free. Generally if a text is available from multiple sources, and one is add-free, then we stick with add-free source and remove the redundant add-based source. The reason is anyone can download texts from Gutenberg, create a site with lots of adds. Not saying that is the case with your site, but since we have a central add-free source at the PG site we should probably stick with that. -- Stbalbach 16:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Stephen Project Gutenberg and Wikipedia are run on donations and grants from public institutions and can get tax deductible donations. In this case, at www.mobilebooks.org I am offering all the material for free that can be loaded to cheap java enabled phones. As far as a know nobody has done that so far. The ads only cover some of the expenses. Well I might have to shut down the project down which will be a loss to all.

John, you should be commended for making these files freely available. But I'm not sure there is a web advertising business model in it, since anyone (including PG) can make the files available elsewhere in a more high profile site - users don't need to go to your site to get the files. It is the same reason Wikipedia will never have web advertising, someone else could just replicate WikiP elsewhere, without the advertising and with additional content. Maybe PG would help fund your efforts? -- Stbalbach 17:43, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

John, in response to your comment to me, you've got four spam warnings on this account and at least two (from memory) on your other account. Sarah Ewart 22:47, 22 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A Message from the Sea[edit]

The article you wrote, A Message from the Sea, is uncategorized. Please help improve it by adding it to one or more categories, so it may be associated with related articles. A stub marker or other template doesn't count - please put in an actual category in the article.Eli Falk 22:24, 9 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Johnmizzi.jpg[edit]

Thank you for uploading Image:Johnmizzi.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you created this image yourself, please look at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#For image creators, select one of those tags, and add it to the image. To do that, simply go to Image:Johnmizzi.jpg, click "edit this page", and add the appropriate tag. Be sure to remove the current tag indicating a lack of licensing!

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask me at User talk:Angr or at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. —An gr 16:05, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]