User talk:Monkeyman

Please click here to leave me a new message.
I will typically answer on your talk page to make sure you get the notification.

I archive this page about once every billion years. Archives can be found here.

External Links

Why did you delete my links? You said, "Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites)". Firstly, if you had visited the page, you would know that it is not a commercial website. Secondly, that web page is not mine. I may have the same username as is mentioned in the URL of the site, but that is coincidental. I only know of that site because I googled my username, and that came up. Well, actually, a couple of forum posts and tech gadget reviews came up, and I was intrigued that someone else had the same username as me, so I followed links, and found a link to the website in a NewNova Forum post. Thirdly, and most importantly, the website provides relevant content, and you said that I am "encouraged to add content". So, to surmise, I added content, and did not spam the site. It's amazing that this site has come so far, considering that I have people jumping down my throat for trying to improve the standards of the website. If you don't believe me, visit the website through the links and tell me if it is relevant. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Astral9 (talk • contribs)

I have to call shenanigans here. Before this edit to Monkeyman's user page, this user had made 13 edits, and every one of them had been to add this link, which "coincidentally" he/she shares a username with. That is the sum total of his/her participation in Wikipedia. And the site in question is, to be charitable, nothing special. The advice that made it such a must-have for the malware page is "buy some software." Amazing coincidence, or someone surreptitously pushing their affiliate marketing site? You make the call. · rodii · 23:36, 4 March 2006 (UTC)

Okay, firstly, as you said, I did not have any previous edits. Don't you think that if I had anything to hide, I would change my username? It's pretty easy to sign up for an account, and because I have no previous edits, it wouldn't harm me in any way. I am not affiliated with the site, so I will not link to it again, but I have participated in many online communities before, and I have never spammed anyone, so I would hate to tarnish my reputation with this. I would, however, like to clear a few things up. For one thing, the "amazing coincidence". Rodii, try googling your name and see how many results come up. I'm sure not all of them are you. If you had googled my name, you would have seen that there were even some sites in other languages, and given that the site is in english, and I only speak english, it is clear that those sites involve different people. In fact, it looks like there are two languages other than english, which indicates that there are at least four people in the world with the same username. Now, given the population of the earth, I don't see how that's an "amazing coincidence".

Also, the "affiliate marketing" thing. The website does not reccomend to buy products (besides reccomending buying a commercial antivirus solution, but naming two competitors. Do you think Norton or Mcaffee would really pay money to have both their products and their biggest competitor's products listed?). Have you never seen a free website before? Free hosting puts ads on the top of the page, which the webmaster has no control over. In the actual content of the page, the webmaster says to "use one of these three free antivirus solutions" if they do not have a commercial product. He/she never mentions a specific product or company under the Firewall section, or throughtout most of the website. Additionally, there are no links to paid software, so there is no way to track how many people have bought a product based on the site's reccomendation, which is the core purpose of most affilliate marketing schemes.

So, to surmise, I don't care that you have removed that site, but I don't want you to think of me as a spammer. I have been using wikipedia regularly for about three years now, and have reccomended it to many people. I just wanted to clear that up, and I apologize for any inconvenience. Oh, and I do have one question: what did that text snippet mean when it said that Wikipedia is driving for print publications? Did it mean that they want to print Wikipedia, that they wanted to achieve that level of quality, or that they want to have printed references for their work? I can't remember the entire snippet, but I am interested. 09:36, 5 March 2006 Astral9

regards to your edit

Hi, I added mydietblogger.com because it is very similar to HealthDiaries.com, which is already linked there. Since they both are free services, but offer different user experiences, I do not understand why the link I placed was removed while their's remains. Furthermore, it is a great and unique resource. Regards, Jasmin 20:32, 4 March 2006 Mydietblogger

Hi Mydietblogger. Sorry but we cannot accept commercial links in our articles. We have a serious spam problem at Wikipedia and unfortunately we have had to take a very strong policy against external links. If we did not have this policy we would be overrun with advertisers. It is honestly nothing personal against you or your site ... we are trying to offer our readers content only. If they wish to find blogs, products, or services that is up to them to find them on their own. Monkeyman^(talk) 01:42, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

External Links - Dog Articles

Hi 67.165.172.102. I've noticed you're adding quite a few external links to many dog articles. Please make sure you are not affiliated with these links. Submitting links to your own websites is against Wikipedia policy. Monkeyman^(talk) 16:47, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

No. I'm just trying to make it easy and quick to find related websites. Nothing more. I found the format I'm using on another dog article and liked it. I thought it'd be nice if the others wre like that too only SirIssacBrock seems to disagree with me and would rather the external links to the dog articles be a hodgepodge to make it harder for the average user to wade through them and find what they want. I also thought the purpose of external links was to list related sites to help educate people and here he is editing them out on the Dogo Argentino. What gives? An eucational site that surpresses education of the general public? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.165.172.102 (talk • contribs)

There is a standard format for the external link section here. As long as your link formating adheres to this you'll be fine. Monkeyman^(talk) 17:04, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I saw the format being used already on one of the dog articles and thought: That's a novel idea, why aren't they all like that. If the external link format was wrong on one dog article that should've been caught by you or someone else. Geez, that's fine if Wikipedia likes the external links to be a hodegepodge, but, I can tell you as an average user --- we don't. It's nice to have them broken up by club,a ssociations, and socities; rescue; etc....

The Dogo Argentino article does not require four subheader for six links under the External Links sections. For that few in number it require zero subheaders. Cordially SirIsaacBrock 17:35, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Unfortunately we've got nothing written down in WP policy so we wind up with confusion like this. Monkeyman^(talk) 17:38, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Cellular repeater

You removed the external link www.cellboost erstore.com/index.html on the cellular repeater page I created and wrote. I understand your reasoning, but since I used it heavily as a reference in the creation of the site, and it contains some extra information, I feel it should stay there. I was under the impression that Wikipedia did not issue a blanket ban to all sites with any commercial aspects, just those which offered no relevant contribution to the understanding of the topic of the article. I do not stand to make any fiscal or otherwise commercial gain by promoting this site.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Nobodyinpart (talk • contribs)

Hi Nobodyinpart. Sorry I had to remove that link but we have a serious spam problem at Wikipedia. We have advertisers constantly trying to sneak their links into many of our articles. In response to this we have had to adopt a very strict external link policy. Monkeyman^(talk) 17:28, 5 March 2006 (UTC)

Is this really fair monkeyman? If I used a particular site as a source of information, surely it's only legal to include a reference to that site? For example, I relied heavily on the information on www.motoun locknow.com (site doesn't sell anything) for the Subsidy Password article - and the reference link was removed. Since it was a valid reference that I used heavily in writing the article, am I allowed to put there reference back on there? InTheCityOf 17:50, 5 March 2006 GMT

Stock_market#Articles

Hi, You removed a reference to my web site. It is at this url : http://www.stock-article.com/. It is probably the funniest article written on stock market and very educational at that. You have read the full article to appreciate it. Please review it again and let me know if you can publish it. Sincerely, --Gautam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.17.133.67 (talk • contribs)

Hi Gautam. I'm sorry but we can't accept commercial links like these in our articles. Monkeyman^(talk) 12:50, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

No problem. A copy of the article is present at the non-commercial site as well : http://www.maadhuk ari.com/prabandha/marketexp.html. Hope you will reconsider. Thanks, --Gautam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.17.133.67 (talk • contribs)

Linkspam criteria

I wish you had not merged the "suspicious edits" and "edits which should be reverted" sections. It's been a bit obscured, but the distinction between those two sections was supposed to be edits which might be spam as opposed to edits which almost certainly are spam. With all the content added in between, it has become confused. Jdavidb (talk • contribs) 15:09, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Jdavidb. I'll take a look and try to separate them out again. Feel free to make any edits you wish. The project page was in need of a little TLC so I thought I'd try and polish it up a bit. Monkeyman^(talk) 15:36, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! It's probably not a big deal if they stay merged for a while, or even a long time. Just wanted to mention what the original intent was.

The project is definitely in need of TLC, and you did a great job with it, and having those sections take an alternative form to the direction I was going is a very small price to pay for having someone work over the entire page, which we continue to need.

Keep shooting spammers! :) Jdavidb (talk • contribs) 16:41, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Message Above

Hey Monkeyman, I left you a message under the Cellular Repeater section about links and I think you probably didn't see it. I'd really like a response since I'm wondering whether the links really were out of place. Best Regards. Inthecityof 8:09 PM, 6th March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Inthecityof. I got your message and I still think these links are unaccepatable. cellboost erstore.com exists solely to sell a product. motoun locknow.com redirects to cell-un lock.com which also exists solely to sell a service. It would be against policy to include these links. Also, you can sign your name/date with ~~~~. Monkeyman^(talk) 21:18, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Acne vulgaris

I was trying to correct my mistake when the page was moved. My mistake, I was following the editor's contribution history from other articles he had spammed, but the spam had been reverted two or three edits before the last edit. I should have paid more attention when I linked in from the editor's contributions. -- Donald Albury (Dalbury)^(Talk) 22:39, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, ok. Monkeyman^(talk) 22:40, 6 March 2006 (UTC)

Our Declining Popularity

It's good to see that I'm not the only one who's not popular among spammers informative-external-link-adders. OhNoitsJamie^Talk 19:16, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

How'd you

find this out?Gator (talk) 20:53, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Just go to http://www.arin.net/ and type in the IP address.  :) Monkeyman^(talk) 20:57, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a problem with your request, but......

Why is this site so one sided? The link that I post tells the truth. When autosurfing is paying, it says so. When autosurfing is not paying, it says so? Why is this site not considered content? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.155.69.228 (talk • contribs)

Hi 24.155.69.228. I'm sorry I keep removing your link but please try to understand this issue from Wikipedia's point of view. We have tons of people trying to sneak their links into our articles every day in an effort to drive traffic to their site. It's completely maddening. The goal at Wikipedia is to write an unbiased article ... how can our articles be unbiased if we have links promoting one product, service, or view over another? It is honestly nothing personal, we just want to write good, neutral articles. Why not sign up for a Wikipedia account and contribute? Monkeyman^(talk) 23:12, 7 March 2006 (UTC)

Afd

Hello. Could you please comment on the proposal at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/M.O.V.E.R? I you have time. Metta Bubble 01:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

I think the problem is that we can't verify M.O.V.E.R. We have no evidence that it even existed let alone if it was notable. Monkeyman^(talk) 01:28, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Hmmmm. Google wouldn't be the appropriate avenue to verify this. Shame really, it's interesting content (if true). ॐ Metta Bubble^talk 02:26, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

hey

u r gay fag face —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.20.123.17 (talk • contribs)

I like yours better, it's less demeaning. This is pretty new to me... should I remove it or leave it? Gflores ^Talk 16:07, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Gflores. Please consider the possibility that your friend above and User:208.20.123.17 may be one in the same. Monkeyman^(talk) 16:27, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

The possibility didn't cross my mind, but I highly doubt they're the same person. I could be wrong though. Gflores ^Talk 17:51, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

WHY ?

Why you remove my contributions http://video.go ogle.com/videoplay?docid=-5137581991288263801&q=loose+change

Please discuss controversal changes on the talk page before making them. Monkeyman^(talk) 18:00, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

try watching the moive for a start! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe1joe1joe2 (talk • contribs)

This is something you could discuss on the talk page. Why not present it there rather than simply making edits that you know will be reverted? Monkeyman^(talk) 18:06, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

it isnt nonsense try watching the movie you biased —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe1joe1joe2 (talk • contribs)

Image

Hello, the image Image:Monkeyman.png you uploaded may soon be deleted since it has no source/license information. Please tag it appropriately. Mushroom (Talk) 19:15, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Tagged as {{GFDL-self}}. I think I uploaded this before they had the nifty Licensing dropdown menu on Special:Upload. Monkeyman^(talk) 19:25, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Pardon?

Sorry, I'm not certain what I did that merited your last comment. I have been trying to help, but if I've done something incorrectly please let me know specifically what that was. 69.157.118.2 03:48, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi 69.157.118.2. My comment was left in response to this edit. It looked as if you were doing a test on an article page. Although I see now you were trying to add a ' * ' and accidently typed an ' 8 '. We're a bit overcautious around here about edits like these since we get so much vandalism but I see you were adding legitimate content. Carry on!  :) Monkeyman^(talk) 12:44, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Ajfan101

why did you talkk to me —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajfan101 (talk • contribs)

Because of this edit. Monkeyman^(talk) 18:33, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Acne links

Hello, Sorry if I offended you. I felt these links could be useful to readers. If you prefer, I will not post them anymore. Scott —Preceding unsigned comment added by Watchtradition@yahoo.com (talk • contribs)

Hi Scott. I'm not offended but unfortunately we cannot accept links like these because of the excessive Google Adsense ads. Monkeyman^(talk) 20:55, 9 March 2006 (UTC)

Laurie Anderson "POV" stuff

See the comments I left on User talk:23skidoo#Laurie Anderson "POV" stuff. They apply to you as well. --ILike2BeAnonymous 20:34, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

And I have already responded to them on his talk page. If you want to remove the POV from the Hendrix article, feel free. I'll do it later when I have time. 23skidoo 20:49, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding your reverts of my edits, and this comment on my user discussion page, copied here for context:

Unfortunately, I have to side with the editor who removed descriptive terms like "stirring" from the Laurie Anderson article. Yes, it makes the article somewhat bland but unfortunately those are the rules. To use terms like that would be a violation of WP:NPOV because it indicates a point of view. The way to get around this is to find a quotation from a reviewer and include it (making sure to properly cite the source, of course).

This is bullshit. By your lights, the following should be stricken from the article on Jimi Hendrix:

• Further success came with the incendiary and original "Purple Haze"
• ... and the soulful ballad "The Wind Cries Mary".
• ... an explosive 12-minute rendition of his anti-war epic Machine Gun.
• He belted out a dismal rendition of "Who Knows" before snapping a vulgar response at a female who shouted a request for "Foxy Lady".

There are more, but I won't belabor the point. The point being that, yes, accuracy and verifiability are good things, but on the other hand, there seem to be armies of anal editors like yourself scouring the place daily, apparently intent on draining every drop of blood from each and every page to make it more "encyclopedic". Since when does "encyclopedic" mean "tomblike", or "ossified"? Does one need to get approval or conensus (or exhaustive documentation) for every descriptive adjective one uses? Context, man, context.

By the way, more and more it appears to me that anyone using that little Wiki-in-acronym "POV" is an unthinking Wiki-robot or automaton. The phrase, and indeed the very policy, are quickly losing any meaning they may once have had. Better to use real words (again, descriptive adjectives) like "biased", "prejudiced", "subjective", etc. --ILike2BeAnonymous 20:08, 10 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi ILike2BeAnonymous. I think you mistook my curt edit summary for something akin to a hand in your face accompanied by a "oh no she di'int". This is not the case. I agree with you 100% that the majority of the articles at Wikipedia are very clinical and are not very fun to read. But, the articles here have to conform to a neutral tone .... it's an encyclopedia not an editorial. I should have explained the reasons behind my edits more thoroughly. Sorry. Well, that said, I hope this hasn't soured you as an editor and that you will stick around for a while. Monkeyman^(talk) 02:02, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Well said. I agree that it would be nice to color up the articles, but Wales wants this place to be more like Brittanica. POV statements are frowned upon, but OTOH we're able to create articles on subjects like Laurie Anderson or Jimi Hendrix. It's a trade-off. 23skidoo 03:44, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

[responding to comment immediately above] "Wales wants"? What the hell are you--a Jimbo Wales-saluting automaton? or an editor?

[responding to previous comment] Thanks for responding (nicely, too). Just to clarify: my beef isn't with the "NPOV" policy, but with 23skidoo's misapplication of that policy. And "NPOV" does not necessarily mean "no descriptive adjectives of any kind whatsoever". There's this thing called editorial discretion, a subset of critical thinking and all that. (Which makes it, of course, subjective after all.) --ILike2BeAnonymous 03:51, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

external links

Monkeyman, I understand the need to keep a tight reign on what kinds of external links are posted in the wiki. However, I believe you are much too quick to remove sites that are of great benefit to those who are looking for more information regarding ETFs. I noticed in the ETF section you have removed ETF Central as well as ETF Investor, both of which, while not as extensive as Morningstar or Yahoo, provide content that is just as valuable. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Investorz (talk • contribs)

how is value determined?

OK, just noticed a link to ETF Basics (http://mutualfunds.about.com/od/etfs/), clearly a valuable site but one that is monetized is well. Please have a look at http://www.etfinvestor.com and http://www.etf-fund-investing.com once again and provide an explanation of the differences between them.

What is the distinction other than About.com is more well known? In addition, there is an article listed in the reference section by a Morningstar analyst which links directly to Morningstar (also a commercial site). So it's OK for large commercial sites to provide external links?

I don't mind you removing links, but provide a clearer explanation of why the link was removed rather than a quick "canned" answer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Investorz (talk • contribs)

24.87.78.128

Thanks! Sorry my contribution wasn't too great. :( —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.87.78.128 (talk • contribs)

My test1 message to you was in response to this edit. Monkeyman^(talk) 23:18, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

Stock_market#Articles

Hi, You removed a reference to my web site. It is at this url : www.stock-arti cle.com/. You thought it is commericial link. But it is not. Anyway, a copy of the article is present at a completely non-commercial site as well : www.maadhu kari.com/prabandha/marketexp.html. Hope you will reconsider. Sincerely, --Gautam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.17.144.172 (talk • contribs)

www.stock-art icle.com is blatant linkfarm/spam/AmazonAds. Please consider adding content directly to the Wikipedia article rather than linking to your website. Monkeyman^(talk) 16:46, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

Hangman

I'm not sure I understand the objection to adsense on linked pages, but since it seems to be an issue, and matters little to me, I just removed it from the linked page at FriendlyDragon before restoring the links.

There are many creative variations on how the game is portrayed on the web, so I do think there is room for various links there. I also restored the other links that had some ads on them, but if you feel that strongly, I'm not going to get in an edit war over it. However, commercial does not mean irrelevant, and if the other sites have the same pay-ratio as mine, noone is taking advantage of Wikipedia to get rich. :)

The one with the hang-glider and continuing game is unique, and without knowing to look for it, it is unlikely anyone will stumble on it in a web search. the multilingual game also struck me as an interesting take on the game.

Anyway, I was not the original poster of those sites, but they seemed to me to be worthwhile additions. I don't feel the need to get overly emotional over them, however, so if you feel strongly they don't belong, I won't re-add them.

Now, on a different topic, I'd like to share my thoughts on Adsense and get some frustration off my chest. First it is quite different than a Link_farm. A linkfarm is a collection of links whose only purpose is to artificially inflate link count as measured by search engines. Adsense does not do this. Google chooses ads to place on the site, and does so based on what it perceives to be the site's content. Because they exist only programatically, being written at runtime by a javascript, they are neither indexed nor seen by web spiders or crawlers (that generally do not execute code from the page). Adsense can be abused, but if included in a generally useful site tend to be more usefull than nuisance to viewers of the page, as Google does a pretty good job of determining the intended audience. The whole point, for google and the advertisers is to present something users of the page want to see.

While the site owner does get paid if people click on an ad, those who earn significant income tend to design a site around adsense, not place adsense on a site. The hangman page was generating on average 3-4 cents per day. The entire site generates about $5 month ... you can see why removing the adsense doesn't bother me from a monetary viewpoint :)

However, the links it provided were nearly always related to similar things my viewers might have been interested in. If not, noone forces them to click, (just as noone forces them to click the wikipedia link at the bottom of the hangman and concentration pages).

—Preceding unsigned comment added by GameMan (talk • contribs)

Odd messages

I am puzzled. I clicked on an internet site and then used a portal which directed me to this Wikipedia page. I seem to have been accused of vandalising pages! As far as I'm aware, I've never used Wikipedia before. I won't do so anyhow, if they are so badly set up that they can misread someone's user IP. Yours Disgruntled. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.8 (talk • contribs)

Sorry for messing up -- thanks for the heads-up

Hi there -- thanks for the "heads up" re simply adding links to my pages not being a good thing. I thought that since I had useful, relevant content, thsi woudl be OK. Based on earlier feedback from "uberpenguin", if I see anywhere where I think my material is of interest, I'm simply adding a note to the "talk page" for that topic so the folks who manage the topic can decide if they want to add the link or not. Sorry to have been a bother -- cheers -- Max —Preceding unsigned comment added by MeMyselfMax (talk • contribs)

Can I ask why on the DAPs page you related creativelabratory.com as spam and yet epizenter was not removed? As far as I can tell both sites came out on the scene on the same week. How is one spam and the other not. One is owned by Dapreview.com (5000 users in its registry) and the other by Misticriver.net (25000 users). I would be interested to see why it is labeled spam.

Vandal 195.93.21.8

No problem, happy to help :-) --Cactus.man ✍ 18:23, 14 March 2006 (UTC)

Question on External Links

HI Monkeyman, Question on external links. From what I read on the beginner's tutorials, we're encouraged to place the sites that we're using as sources for new content we add/edit into Wikipedia. I'm often using my site, the Credit Help Guide US, as this source. However it has been pulled twice by you when I list it. When content has been added/edited and then I list the site as a source, isn't that acceptable? Thanks for your help in me understanding. Dwcusc 00:49, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Dwcusc. The link you are adding to articles (www.mone yadvance.us) is not a reference site, it is a click referral page. Please understand that we have a serious spam problem at Wikipedia. We are constantly under attack from advertisers who would love to get their links listed in our articles. Because of this, we have had to adopt a very strict external link policy and unfortunately there are very few links that warrant mention in the external links or references section. Monkeyman^(talk) 03:22, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Acne vulgaris External Links

ok >:D —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.168.223.153 (talk • contribs)

Bechna.com

Good spot on the vandalism Deizio 21:41, 16 March 2006 (UTC)

Stock_market#Articles

Hi, My www.stock-ar ticle.com is not a linkfarm. It is a very nice article on stock market written in a funny way. In fact this comes as the very first item if you search on 'stock market experience' at www.msn.com. It used to come on google too. Now it does not because of duplicate content. But it has a google page rank 4 which is pretty high for someone's personal web site. That shows how relevant it is to the subject. I removed all the amazon ads. I have not made a penny from those anyway to date. Hope I can put the link now. Thanks, --Gautam —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.17.144.172 (talk • contribs)

This is a blatant Google AdSense link. Please do not add it again. Monkeyman^(talk) 01:59, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

Mumbai Suburban Railway - Your Edit

You deleted two links to a blog site on this as spam. Unfortunately, they are a commentary of the actual Mumbai train experience. While it does not belong as a Wikipedia article, it definitely is extra information that anyone who would want to take the train should know. Request you to revert to the previous version. Best S (User:Srinikasturi)

Please review your edit history which consists entirely of you adding www.lazyrea der.com links to the external links section of multiple articles. Every link you have added contained Google AdWords and Google Syndication PageAds. Wikipedia encourages editors to add content directly to the articles instead of simply adding external links. I'm sorry but I cannot agree to your revert request. Monkeyman^(talk) 02:34, 17 March 2006 (UTC)

External Links

Hi there,

I got your message and sorry that I didn't realize that the external links I added would be considered advertising! I felt that the links were very relevant given that the games being discussed are now available on a whole new platform, and worthy of mention in the encyclopedia as it is the next step in the historical evolution of the games. Also in the NAMCO entry, the addition of a brand new division of the parent company is entirely relevant knowledge for the online community and I did not believe it to be 'spam' (for example, like adding a link to a particular brand of french fries would be in a wiki entry about ketchup). I do understand though that an article entry is much more valuable and non-controversial than a quick link and will work on this.

Thanks!

—Preceding unsigned comment added by Waffle88 (talk • contribs)

McVeigh/Yousef

re: McVeigh "You wouldn't happen to know a link for the "Yousef statement" McVeigh refers to, would you? Monkeyman(talk) 16:31, 17 March 2006 (UTC)"

Sorry, I've got nothing on Yousef. I only know he was a cellmate of McVeigh's at Supermax, so McVeigh would have had access to material not widely circulated. pat8722 00:30, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The transcript should be around somewhere. CNN reports on it here: " Before sentencing, Yousef made a rambling, 17-minute statement in which he said, "Yes, I am a terrorist and proud of it as long as it is against the U.S. government." ". Too bad they don't have the whole transcript of the statement, it would make a great addition to the Yousef article. I'll look around a bit more and see if I can find it. Monkeyman^(talk) 02:57, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Verify

How about actually *checking* revisions instead of blantantly accusing the last person to edit added some links? You are doing a disservice to Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeepSlasher (talk • contribs)

Can you please let me know which edits you believe I have incorrectly reverted? Your edit history doesn't show which artilces I might have incorrectly removed links from. Monkeyman^(talk) 05:17, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

Outside Links

I didn't notice any response from you regarding how the value of outside links is determined. Is more value given to sites that are larger and more established whether they are "for profit" or not? If that is the case, it undermines what the wiki system is trying to do. In addition any outside link should be able to be recommended and put into a queue for vote rather than deleted (with the accompanied canned response) by someone such as yourself. How about a little democracy here.. that is what the wiki system is all about.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Investorz (talk • contribs)

Please see Wikipedia is not a democracy. -- Donald Albury^(Talk) 13:14, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

The policy on external links is very strict due to the amount of spam, adwords, commmercial, and advertising links people try to sneak into articles. The first sentence in this policy partly answers your question of when to link externally: Not very often. Your links fall under this category, specifically points 2, 3, 5, and possibly 9.

2. any site that does not provide a unique resource

3. Links that are added to promote a site

5. Sites with objectionable amounts of advertising

9. A website that you own or maintain

If you disagree with my reasoning, please discuss your objections on the talk page of the particular article where you would like to include the link. Monkeyman^(talk) 14:38, 18 March 2006 (UTC)

from 0waldo

Tweeter and the monkeyman were hard up for cash, they stayed up all night selling cocaine and hash to an undercover cop who had a sister named jan, for reasons unexplained she loved the monkeyman! 0Waldo. (from zimmy on the traveling wilburies CD) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 65.193.87.7 (talk • contribs)

Spam - Investment Club

You removed my line from investment clubs on Proshare. It was not spam, it is the UK equivalent of NAIC (a link already on the site). Unless you plan on Wikipedia just to be US centric, then it would best be left on. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.28.92 (talk • contribs)

The NAIC is an independent, not-for-profit organization. I couldn't find such information on proshareclubs.co.uk. Can you please let me know where this is? Monkeyman^(talk) 23:33, 20 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Monkeyman. It's true, and I agree with 82.13.28.92. See the last paragraph on this page. -- Linkspamremover 15:58, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi, Not a problem, I don't work for Proshare. Proshare was founded by the London Stock Exchange, you can find more about the charity at http://ifsproshare.org. They transferred proshareclubs to Digitallook (which does run for profit) but they added it to their portfolio to support the investment community. Kind regards Paul —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.28.92 (talk • contribs)

Deleting?

Why did you delete the article Richard O'Neil? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.38.138.130 (talk • contribs)

I think you've got the wrong editor. I never deleted such an article. Monkeyman^(talk) 15:17, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

High School project

I am taking a Master's level course and it was suggested that a Wiki could be used by high school students as a way of collaborating towards the creation of an e-business for a Workplace skills class. I have as of yet not understood how the wiki could be used for this or if a wiki can be created with limited access. Can you help me?

fatcatgfld@hotmail.com

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.255.47.40 (talk • contribs)

Hi fatcatgfld. There's an article here that might be of some help. Monkeyman^(talk) 15:16, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Education spam

Hi, Monkeyman,

Thanks for adding the spam cleanup tag to the Education article! :-) I hope you also might have some time to help remove the commercial links. In addition, take a look at the Education project and think about whether you would like to join that one as well. Regards, Rfrisbie^talk 16:01, 21 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi. in a moment of

over exuberance I created an article for ’’Girolamo Masani when it turned out that there already was one [which I might or might not have created]. The good one has a picture on it and the ‘’’BAD’’’ was does not. Is deleting it something that you can do? Carptrash 06:42, 22 March 2006 (UTC) , because someone needs to.

Wait. Are you NOT an administrator? Carptrash 06

44, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Your article Girolamo Masani has been redirected to Girolamo Masini by an anon user. If you still want it deleted you can list it on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion since it doesn't quite fall into a speedy delete category. I think the redirect is ok though.  :) Monkeyman^(talk) 13:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

As long as folks looking for Masini get the best that we have to offer, that's fine with me. I was going to drop by and say "Thanks" but got distracted (see Adult ADD ) by your Pearl S. Buck article. My grandfather knew her in China and so her name always catches my eye. I might do something about the movies of her books. Carptrash 01:43, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

wikipedia

i think wikipedia is a great website to use. I LIKE FOOD

Great, then how about not adding any more nonsense ? Thanks! Monkeyman^(talk) 21:14, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Im sorry that i tell the truth fishes do bite your weiner in the ocean and smoking does turn your lun::gs to shit —Preceding unsigned comment added by Student (talk • contribs)

your message

Hello, I received two messages recently about posting articles. I honestly can't figure out what, if anything can be posted. Can you tell me whether I can post an article or not? I did and someone deleted my link because it goes to my website where the article is. I also have some links to wikpedia on some of my articles - is this allowed? Thanks, sylviadac —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sylviadac (talk • contribs)

Hi Sylviadac. Welcome to Wikipedia. I hope we haven't scared you off.  :) Your links were primarily removed because of the Google AdSense ads on your site. Unfortunately the articles at Wikipedia are under constant attack from site owners who try to include their links in hopes of driving traffic to their sites. I'm not saying this is what your intention was but please try to understand this issue from Wikipedia's point of view. You are certainly welcome to add articles and content here but linking to your own sites is against the rules. Sorry your first experience here seemed a bit harsh but we're just trying to keep our articles clean. I hope you stick around. Monkeyman^(talk) 00:23, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

signing messages

Hi Monkeyman. Could you remember to sign messages on user talk pages, even when they're just warning templates? It's useful for others to know who left a template. Thanks, FreplySpang (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. I'm usually pretty good about it. One too many beers and that tilde gets pretty darn hard to find.  :) Monkeyman^(talk) 13:03, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

No worries - it's a sneaky little key! :-) FreplySpang (talk) 16:39, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

EES

Hello. I was just wonderring why was my page deleted fromyour database. It was named electrical engineering students. Waiting for your response. Thanks Rajeeb —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajeeb.mi (talk • contribs)

Can you give me any more details about the article such as when it was created? Articles at wikipedia have to meet certain criteria or they are marked for deletion. A list of electrical engineering students probably fails this particular policy. Your article was likely listed on Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion. If you know the date it was created you can probably locate the discussion surrounding its deletion. Monkeyman^(talk) 13:17, 23 March 2006 (UTC)

Marit Larsen

hmm, I think the external links are okay. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arieriswandy (talk • contribs)

favor

Can you check this user. 4.243.1.189 (talk · contribs) He seems to be adding a lot of ext links, but some of thing actually seem helpful. I don't know, what do you think? Gflores ^Talk 07:37, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

Hi Gflores. The links aren't harmful and they're not spam, but I don't know if all of them are useful. They're all to the same website (jqjacobs net) so I'll assume this is his website. We could revert them on that point but I think his intentions are good. It'd be nice if he would include the content directly into the article instead of just linking. I'd say not to worry about it unless he starts posting AdSense ads to his pages. Monkeyman^(talk) 18:25, 26 March 2006 (UTC)

short summary

can you give me a short summary of what england was like after charles 1 death —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.93.21.8 (talk • contribs)

Hells yeah. Can I do your math homework for you too? Monkeyman^(talk) 19:46, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

Phishing cleanup

You posted the cleanup tag for the phishing article. What needs to be fixed? there's nothing beyond that in the talk page, so i don't know how to fix it up.--ZeWrestler ^Talk 18:29, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

I was chasing a spammer at the time so I threw the cleanup tag in there with the intention to return and clean it up. I cleared out the spam links and removed the tag. Thanks for the reminder. Monkeyman^(talk) 19:55, 27 March 2006 (UTC)

My pleasure --ZeWrestler ^Talk 05:19, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

your message re: commercial links

I don't believe I have ever posted any link on wikipedia, much less a commercial one, though I have been known to provide a few small bits of missing information from time to time (I wasn't aware I could provide a link). I see you've been rather busy, and though I haven't had time to follow the links I approve of your subject material. I hope you're doing it justice, though I'm sure there are others who will try to mess it up. Good luck. -John —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.16.75.56 (talk • contribs)

Target (Australia)

Hi, User:ThomasTechnologies has just added himself to WikiProject Spam but wants to add links to his site at Target (Australia), Target Corporation and Scrip. Perhaps you could add some comments to Talk:Target (Australia) if you agree with my decision? I don't think he has got the idea yet. Thanks -- Barrylb 06:49, 31 March 2006 (UTC)

I agree with you ... sorry I wasn't around sooner but fortunately his additions appear to have ended. His link addition isn't spam but it really doesn't add any content to the article. A collection of gift card images? I don't get it. How does this contribute to the article? Will keep an eye out. Monkeyman^(talk) 04:35, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold

The paragraph you removed on the harris and klebold page, you say you would keep it if there was a source. Some of it is still very much op-ed regardless if there is a source, particularly the statement : "The presence of anger on this level has to be explained and understood if policy makers are ever to be able to make educated changes in policy.". This is POV in its purest form. This is not to say the rest of the paragraph is not POV, just that this part is very clear.--Paraphelion 21:12, 1 April 2006 (UTC)

I agree. I meant to say that I would keep the part of the paragraph that stated they were homosexuals if there was a reliable source. Monkeyman^(talk) 00:07, 2 April 2006 (UTC)

?

I had thought that we agreed since I removed all the ads from the page, it was no longer a problem with the link. Whatever, I won't be putting concentration or hangman back. Instead, I'll put adsense back on my page and forget Wikipedia. Heaven forbid anything at all creative be linked to the page. —Preceding unsigned comment added by GameMan (talk • contribs)

WikiProject:Spam Opinions and Facts wanted

Hey Monkeyman, I am looking for Wikipedians that are interested in the topic about Link Spam to express their opinion about this. After checking some other Talk Pages and Votes I think you seem to be one of them :)

Talk at at WikiProject:Spam Talk Page: How to save hundreds or thousands of hours by spending just a few

Here is the original Article at my User Talk Page. Thank you very much. I am looking forward to hear your opinion on it and hopefully also some facts about the primary means and the extend of the link spam problem which I am still looking for. Our encounters (some might call it "clashes" :)) tell me, that you are a valuable authority in this matter. I would like to get something that can be meassured/quantified , then estimated (increase/decrease) and afterwards validated and evaluated. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 06:18, 19 April 2006 (UTC)

Why me?

Why can't I add my own link. I've seen hundreds of Wikipedia pages with so many external links and they are not removed. Why me? Do you have crush on me? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 203.167.2.92 (talk • contribs)

Edit stealing

Ha, you've snatched a few from me yourself! Looks like we have a similar spam-target watchlist.... will they ever give up? OhNoitsJamie^Talk 22:19, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

thank you

i edtited the listing. i am new to wikipedia and thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisanola (talk • contribs)

MONKEY!!!!

funny!!! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.56.49.144 (talk • contribs)

NEOPETS

do u like neopets? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.56.49.144 (talk • contribs)

it's ok not typically my first choice for fun... --Starry.dreams 18:16, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

comment on removal of external links / spam

MM, Noted your comment on the removal of external links... specifically for Whey protein. Dated May 9. Is it standard policy that all external links are to be removed now? Or are all links being lumped into "spam" through some association with clearly promotional sites? SupplementData.com has sustained as a resource link for many months and I'm curious why you felt it spam... it's a resource and knowledge base, not a spam or promotion site. thank you, Shawn —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.188.50 (talk • contribs)

Hi Shawn. I originally removed the link because I suspected it violated Wikipedia:External_links#Links_to_normally_avoid, specifically:

• #2 "does not provide a unique resource"
• #3 "Links that are added to promote a site."

I don't see it as a unique resource because the information at your link could/should be included directly into the article. Also, an editor should not link to his own website or websites he/she is affiliated with since it is seen as an attempt to promote a site. Your site is very clean (no advertising, easy to read) and does have good information but I'm not sure it warrants inclusion in this article. I've added your link back for other editors to review though. Monkeyman^(talk) 13:52, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Discussion moved to Talk:Whey_protein.

Why was the real estate bubble article reverted?

Monkeyman, why was the real estate bubble article reverted on May 11, 2005? Specifically, why were the IMF articles removed? Doesn't it raise the bar to link to scholarly economic sources, instead of a commercial real estate portal? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.76.96.15 (talk • contribs)

Hi 130.76.96.15. The edits that took place from April 30 to May 5 were horrid. The earliest edit was an addition of a google adsense link. The next edit was a link to www.jparsons.net/house/ which redirected to here which is a dead link. On this edit someone removed one link and gave their's higher priority (one that similarly redirects to http://mysite.verizon.net/vodkajim/housingbubble/ to the other link above). Here the links were shuffled around here for no apparent reason.

In short, the only legitimate edit I saw from April 30 to May 5 was the change from "U.S. housing bubble" to "United States housing bubble" which I added back after my revert to Kevin Taylor. I don't see where I broke the link to United States housing bubble. If I did so, it was unintentional. If you have time please correct it. Also, feel free to add back the IMF links. They must have taken some collateral damage. Monkeyman^(talk) 23:38, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

socialaffairsunit.org.uk

The links you have removed are not commercial or spam. For example the articles you removed from the Maurice Cowling piece are discussions of his work by the author of his festschrift Michael Bentley and by the very prominent historian Jeremy Black - both regarded as the leading experts on Maurice Cowling. The articles you have removed from Portrait of a Lady are by the Thomas Wharton Professor of English. They are not commercial and certainly not spam. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.54.230.14 (talk • contribs)

Hi 195.54.230.14. I am not questioning the credentials of these authors. It is the manner in which you are adding these links to Wikipedia that I have a problem with. Please take a look at your edit history, it consists entirely of adding external links to the socialaffairsunit website. Do you work for them or are you affiliated with them? It is considered bad form to link to one's own website. The links on the socialaffairsunit site have what appear to be Amazon reference codes. Are you earning a profit from clickthrus? Please considering signing up for a Wikipedia account and discussing the merits of these links on the article talkpages before adding them. We have a very serious spam problem at Wikipedia and unfortunately have had to take a strong stand against external links. Monkeyman^(talk) 14:05, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

list of sonic games....

I submitted a link weeks ago when there wasn't one there for the ultimate sonic flash, then this dan-dare comes in and just replaces my link...... why are you giving his sites preferential treatment? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.172.160.45 (talk • contribs)

Your edits are consistent with someone who is only trying to drive traffic to their site. I'm certain they are spam which is why I removed them (I mean really, stealing miniclip's games with the intro and everything?). I didn't look into dan-dare but I suspect he's got the same story. Monkeyman^(talk) 21:09, 13 May 2006 (UTC)

Excuse Me.

I have question about something. What is RFA? because I have heard the world RFA many times in other person's discussion page. Could you explain to me RFA in my talk-page? Thanks. Because You have an experience of Wikipedia. Ahh, How to put my picture in my own page? Do you know how? So, you must send me message, and then explain to me about RFA, and the way of putting picture in owner's page. Ok? Daniel5127, 02:08, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Daniel5127. Most of the time when RFA is used it refers to Wikipedia:Requests_for_adminship. Occasionally it refers to Requests_for_arbitration. You can read up on either of these at those links. Hope you're having a good time at Wikipedia! Monkeyman^(talk) 13:18, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Up with People?

Dude, I was involved with them for 3 years and my brother Kevin was the drummer in Cast A for 2 years. 1970! Small World. I directed a "local cast" in Toledo, cause I didn't want to leave my girlfriend. Patty Berry, Bob Glastner and others were from Toledo cast! SimonATL 05:51, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Another Question.

Hi, Monkeymen. Thanks you for send me message about RFA. I realized that RFA is abbreviation for Request For Administrator. It's just like voting people for becoming Wikipedia's administrator. Much Appreciated. Ahh, I want to know about Jimbo Whale. I know that Jimbo Whale is founder of Wikipedia, famous Wikipedian. I mean I'm so curious about that. So, Could you explain about Jimbo Whale? Please. Daniel5127, 06:17, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Hi Daniel5127. You can find everything you'd want to know about Jimbo Wales at his Wikipedia article. Also, Wikipedia has a search box on the left of every page. You can type search terms into the box to find any article. Enjoy! Monkeyman^(talk) 11:46, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

My Atkins Link

I've had a discussion with Graeml (sp) and I understand why it was deleted, but I didn't understand why other sites, exactly like mine, were allowed. After having the discussion with Graeml, I've removed all links to forums as well as PETA-sponsored "expose"-type sites that sell a vegetarian agenda.

I apprecciate the help and less-accusing tone. BrianZ 18:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Gah!

That's twice I've forgotten to tag unsigned comments. Thanks for taking care of it. --GraemeL ^(talk) 23:30, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Scienceman123 report on WP:RFI

Well I could, but as you don't have to be an admin to be nice then why not have a go yourself at a small chat? Petros471 08:48, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

Just to let you know I've removed the RFI, but if you still need help with the above just let me know on my talk page. Cheers, Petros471 18:55, 17 May 2006 (UTC)

My reversions

Thank you for bringing this to my attention. I very much appreciate it. Scienceman123 01:49, 18 May 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hi you said my spamming but im not? so whats the problem Can you please quote the Wiki rule that says adding relevent, non-commercial links is against the rules? I thought Wiki was ment to be a site that all users can add content to not just a select few who have no lifes so there on here all day? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dogtoyco (talk • contribs)

Vandalproof

I did give it a quick spin once. I didn't like that fact that I had to turn off the enhanced recent changes option , but maybe I could get used to that... OhNoitsJamie^Talk 17:40, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

my addition

Hi The two links to the site I work for (Consumersearch.com) that I added to two Wikipedia categories were actually based on another link that I saw to our site that was added by a Wikipedia user that has nothing to do with our site. Since then that link was deleted too and I don't know why. The links were very relevant to the categories they were added to. ConsumerSearch.com is a highly respected review site. The American Library Association along with other reference sites, recommends our product comparison report for objectivity. Time Magazine selected ConsumerSearch as one of the top fifty websites, and PC World named it “Best Consumer Advice Site” on the web. We are not a link farm and we strongly oppose any spammy behavior. We truly believe Wikipedia readers would benefit from our editorial comparative reviews. Please feel free to contact me at mlevitte@consumersearch.com. Best Max Max Levitte Managing Producer http://www.consumersearch.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.33.71.193 (talk • contribs)

Max is Maxumer my wikipedia username is maxumer by the way —Preceding unsigned comment added by Maxumer (talk • contribs)

Hi Max. The links you added [1] and[2] were consistent with what Wikipedia classifies as spam. Our criteria are listed here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Spam#How_to_identify_spam_and_spammers. Your links were removed because they matched the following criteria:

• 1. User is anonymous (an IP address)
• 2. User:page and/or User_talk:page are red links
• 3. No edit summary (other than, perhaps /* External links */)
• 5. User has made multiple edits to related articles
• 6. The majority of user's edits are to external links sections
• 7. The link is a site that has Google/Yahoo ads (AdSense/SM).
• 9. Link is trying to sell a product or service.
• 14. User adds links that have been previously removed, without discussing on the talk page.

It is considered bad form to add links to one's own site. Also, please examine your motives ... is it to improve the article or is it to promote your site? Due to a flood of spam additions to the articles on an hourly basis, we have had to adopt a very strict policy on external links. You are welcome to discuss the merits of your external links on the talk pages of the articles. Monkeyman^(talk) 23:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)

VandalProof 1.2 Now Available

After a lenghty, but much-needed Wikibreak, I'm happy to announce that version 1.2 of VandalProof is now available for download! Beyond fixing some of the most obnoxious bugs, like the persistent crash on start-up that many have experienced, version 1.2 also offers a wide variety of new features, including a stub-sorter, a global user whitelist and blacklist, navigational controls, and greater customization. You can find a full list of the new features here. While I believe this release to be a significant improvement over the last, it's nonetheless nowhere near the end of the line for VandalProof. Thanks to Rob Church, I now have an account on test.wikipedia.org with SysOp rights and have already been hard at work incorporating administrative tools into VandalProof, which I plan to make available in the near future. An example of one such SysOp tool that I'm working on incorporating is my simple history merge tool, which simplifies the process of performing history merges from one article into another. Anyway, if you haven't already, I'd encourage you to download and install version 1.2 and take it out for a test-drive. As always, your suggestions for improvement are always appreciated, and I hope that you will find this new version useful. Happy editing! --AmiDaniel (talk) 02:57, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

i have been acused of vandalism. i have not added anything to this website. i use this website for one perpose only; school work. i get warnings that if i vandalise again i cant go on the website. i need this website to complete school work thats it. thats all i do. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 207.200.116.137 (talk • contribs) 20 May 2006 (UTC)

Good job!

WikiThanks

You spotted and corrected what I missed. [3] Thanks! Shinobu 23:26, 23 May 2006 (UTC)

Joblo.com

Hello, Monkeyman - I'm not understanding why you removed the official link for the Joblo.com site. You stated that (I) should remove the pop-ups, and ads, however, I am not affiliated with the site, aside from being a regular visitor. The idea to start a Joblo page came about after that website ran an article about Wikipedia's "movies with use of the F-word" page. After coming over here, I checked to see if Joblo had a page, and it did not. So using information found on the site, I started an article. It seems that the ads are fairly minimal, when compared to IMDb, Yahoo and other movie sites - usually a banner ad. The removal of the book made sense, as I wasn't familiar with just listing the library code, instead of a link to Amazon or so-forth.

I dislike Spam as much as you, and will edit it out when I find it while browsing the wikipedia, though it's only happened sparsely - once while reading information on baby colic and coming across a commercial site (pretty annoying) Joblo.com is anything but that - offers a lot in regards to things of interest for movie fans.

Tell me what I need to do to plead a case here, if I haven't already. Either way, it's not totally important to me, but I do enjoy Wikipedia and am hoping to eventually come across a topic that I know something about and isn't already well done as is, so I need to know how the system works here to at least stay in good with the other users. I don't want to be seen as a spammer or the sort, but am really not understanding the criteria used for the removal of the web link.

Give me some feedback once they let you out of your cage.

PS - I'm tempted to clean up the IMDb page, but again - am not clear on the criteria. There are links to forum boards, among other things that don't really go anywhere.

PSS - I just saw this on the criteria: "#3 "Links that are added to promote a site." ---- That makes sense, but wouldn't that mean every article about a website should be edited for official links to the site? If so.... (cracks knuckles)

BubbaStrangelove 19:55, 24 May 2006 (UTC)BubbaStrangelove 14:52 CST 5/24/06

Discussion moved to Talk:JoBlo.com Monkeyman^(talk) 13:14, 25 May 2006 (UTC)

Affiliate Marketing Article Discussion - Invitation to Participate

Your Contribution History shows that you have some interest in the content and the quality of the Article Affiliate marketing. The Concern has been expressed that this article or section is missing information. An open discussion was started at the articles talk page and I would like to invite you to participate in this discussion and express your opinion regarding the issue that was raised. Sincerely. --roy<sac> ^Talk! .oOo. 09:48, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

Image:Monkey3.jpg

Hello Monkeyman. Your use of Image:Monkey3.jpg on your user page may be copyright infringement because it is a fair use image, which may not be used on user pages. See Wikipedia:Fair use#Policy, number 9. SCHZMO ✍ 13:19, 26 June 2006 (UTC)

Japanther AfD

The Japanther article is on AfD again. I'm hoping you're still around and interested in weighing in over here. Thanks. --Howrealisreal 13:42, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

You're invited :)

Please accept this invite to join the new WikiProject Bodybuilding, a WikiProject dedicated to improving bodybuilding related articles. Simply click here to accept! Addbot (talk) 02:29, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Please cite source for data in your 30-year FRM chart

Hi Monkeyman,

Thanks for including the chart graphic on the Mortgage article. I wondered if you could include a citation of your data source for your image:

Thanks, D —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dikteren (talk • contribs)

Talk:Boston Tea Party

Howdy, I noticed that you and I seem to post in one or two articles dealing with progressive issues in political science/sociology. There's currently a debate beginning in Boston Tea Party as to whether the article should include the category [4]. It meets definitions set in the articles Terrorism and Definition of terrorism, however, there are several self-proclaimed patriots who watch BTP who refuse to recognise the fact. The simple criteria for terrorism generally seem to be intimidation or destruction of property in order to change public policy or public opinion while a state of war has not yet been declared. Some users would rather use recent acts of terrorism as a yardstick, rather than using a firm definition, and hence lose their ability to discuss matters calmly. Would you be able to pop in to the Talk page and join in the discussion? Thanks much, samwaltz 05:03, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hello. I hope I am correct in assuming you're very knowledgeable in the rules and policies concerning the Wikipedia spam project.

I've recently made my first action as a member of the project, and I'd like your opinion on if this was correct or not. Thanks!

¡Kribbeh!^Speak!\_Contribs 17:23, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Ustka + Chełmża + Bory Tucholskie

Napisz Chełmżę po angielsku to ja napiszę porządnie Bory Tucholskie po polsku. Pozdrawiam. --Wladyslaw Golinski 11:59, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

Sorry to bother you with this but lately some with different IP-adress has been harrasing me with some unbelivable accusations, that I'm a sockpuppet for KarlXII and Osli73 and that I'm a chetnik and so on.. see here: [5] and here: [6]. I would be happy if you could look at this and maybe take some precautions. Best regards - Litany 17:26, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

And now again... please see here: [7]. Litany 19:32, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

RE: NASA Budget

In response to your earlier comments on this topic back in 2005, please review my recent changes and improvements to the page at your first convenience. Regards, ~JS~ WSpaceport 16:59, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Re: the famous advertising agencies question. The list now includes 24 advertising agencies. One is an interactive agency, and I think that category should be separate. Three of the remaining 23 aren't particularly famous - I'd consider the rest of them famous based on the work they have produced, the clients they've worked for and longevity. (BTW: I have worked in the advertising agency business for 40 years as a writer, creative director, agency president - so i feel qualified to evaluate)

Advertising materials and information about them, like it or not, are cultural artifacts that teachers and scholars refer to all the time for support in social studies education. There's a concerted effort at many universities, and at the Smithsonian, to archive these materials.

Advertising agencies, especially the smaller ones who often produce groundbreaking work, half a half-live of about 20 years. The come, go, are remembered for a generation, and disappear. There should be many more in the list than are there now IMHO.

In sum: I think a list of 'Famous Advertising Agencies' is legitimate piece of cultural history. Criteria for fame are clients, campaigns, awards, principals. Unfortunately this list will always be flawed because there aren't many folks around who worked for Claude Hopkins, Milton Biow, Howard Gossage, etc etc etc. But it's definitely worth pursuing

So how do i get in?

So if this is free,wheres all the cool place to chill,load or whateva?Please help.

                                                              The Only,
                                                                             TheBigZTurTLex3

hi

what are you talking about? is this a science experiment?

tweeter and the monkeyman were hard up for cash, they stayed up all night selling cocaine and hash, to an undercover cop who had a sister named jan, for reasons unexplained she loved the monkeyman. zimmy

i didnt edit your stupid wikipedia so levae me alone all i have done is searched on it so get a proper job —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.240.244 (talk) 13:59, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean Vandalising the pages... i thought this was a open editing site. im not allowed to put what i want to say on here? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 195.195.240.244 (talk) 13:37, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

hi

hi —Preceding unsigned comment added by Powerdrone (talk • contribs) 00:02, 4 March 2008 (UTC)

WINAD violation

Good afternoon, Monkeyman. You participated in an early discussion about whether the dork page rose above the level of a dictionary entry. After several discussions across different fora, I believe that there was a fairly clear consensus that it didn't. The page was transwiki'd to Wiktionary and later turned into a soft-redirect.

That soft-redirect has been undone by a user who does not seem to be interested in actually discussing the issue on Talk despite my best efforts. I am afraid that I am losing my impartiality on this issue and would appreciate other opinions. When you have time, would you please look at the page? Thanks. Rossami (talk) 19:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

last change

hello??? my edit was approperiat ok?

honda is korea's not japan's

ok so u stop vandalising the great wikipedia —Preceding unsigned comment added by 129.112.109.253 (talk) 02:19, 11 May 2008 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Richmond.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Richmond.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:14, 21 May 2013 (UTC)

Hey there, I don't know who is after me or why but If this is should probably leave? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.52.194.8 (talk) 05:49, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

I'm here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 174.52.194.8 (talk) 05:51, 18 April 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:17, 30 November 2015 (UTC)

接上缐

劉冰兄祝旅途愉快 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2606:6000:FD24:8000:491B:C17F:3CDE:796A (talk) 04:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)