User talk:Samiguzel
Please do not add commercial links or links to your own private websites to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. 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. - Trysha (talk) 06:14, 14 September 2006 (UTC)
kingrottweiler.com[edit]
Hello, that is just the generic warning template. I should have written something much more custom. Besides the fact that wikipedia is not a web directory, portal sites like this one should not be added to wikipedia. Things in the external links section should provide sources for the information in the article. I have looked over that web site, and if you look closely you will see that all of the information there is either stolen verbatim from other web sites on the net (the FAQ for example comes from the rottie club of Canada, many articles come from the usenet FAQs on the breed and breed clubs), or is identical to that to very similar portal sites for other dog breeds, we remove these all the time.
Since you are a rottie fan and do not own the site, you may not know this, but there are how to guides on the internet that describe how to make web sites exactly like this on in order to generate ad revenue. They don't put in overly large amounts of ads, popups, and really obnoxious stuff - because they want to maintain an air of legitamacy in order to get people to link to them. This web site matches this formula exactly, down to the layout and style of the site, the promises of web forums and other features coming soon so folks come back, the ads interspersed with the info. Many of the owners of these sorts of web sites hope that individuals such as yourself will list them in blogs and on wikipedia so that they stick around.
If you want to add things to the external links section, they should be to reliable, verifable sources, and not just someone who has accumulated information a bunch of info (no matter how useful you may think it is) and built a google-ad filled portal. - Trysha (talk) 18:32, 14 September 2006 (UTC)