Misplaced Pages

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by GraemeL (talk | contribs) at 15:59, 16 May 2006 (→Pokeno website link: Reply). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

I am: OUT

• I will reply here unless you ask me to reply somewhere else.
• If I posted something (other than a warning) to your talk page, I probably added it to my watch list. I would prefer replies in the same page as the original post. However, feel free to reply here if you want.

Please click here to leave me a new message.

Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8

Get it pumped

CSD, think this joke has ran its length. Get it pumped. Bill the bear 22:04, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

It has context, so I can't kill it for that. I can't see it fitting any other CSD either. Looks like AfD will kill it anyway. --GraemeL 22:39, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmm...

Is your talk page starting to get a little bloated? :-) Mine is very long...I'm going to archive it soon. --HappyCamper 00:44, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

LOL. I archive when it's over 50 threads and yours just happens to be number 51. I'll probably leave it a day or so to make sure that everybody has seen any replies and then chop the first 50 to an archive. yours is at 143 threads which is definitely on the tubby side. :P --GraemeL 00:49, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

The thing that i changed on mtg preconstructed theme decks was not vandalism, and was the correct thing!

help for a newbie

Hi, I'm new to this and obviously missing something. You reverted a few things I input today. When I saw what this guy was doing http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions&target=Bobby131313 and none of his dozens of links get removed, I can't see how the ones I added would be even coming close to that. I hope you can take a moment to help me understand this, and have a look at what's going on in these numismatic articles. Thanks —This unsigned comment was added by Petertdavis (talk • contribs) .

Well, I didn't catch him doing it at the time. If I had, I would have asked him to stop as the project needs more content, not more external links. He seems to have moved on to making more useful contributions now. Secondly, the forum he was linking to has thousands of posts, whereas the one you were linking to has around 30. Which is likely to be a good source of information? Hope this helps. --GraemeL 12:01, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Let me see if I understand what you're saying. It's ok that he's posted dozens links to a commercial site he owns because he's posted a few images as contributions to Misplaced Pages? Is that what you meant? The other thing, about the forum I posted a link to having 30 posts, I think you didn't look, because the forums I posted links to is about ten times the size of his, and a far more established authority on the topics. Also, the sites I posted are non-commercial, in that they don't sell anything. I think I'm still confused. Petertdavis (talk)

Ah, I see now. You were posting links to sub-sections of the forums, some of which only contained a few topics, but if I jump up to a higher level, I can see that the forum is very large indeed. Feel free to add them back, though our articles always need more content and fewer external links, so please don't go crazy with them. I'm probably going to go through the other users contributions and remove most of his links. On balance, he spammed them across way too many articles. --GraemeL 14:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Removal Of News Item

no big deal..just trying to educate folks about what's happening in the world...thanks..I won't post or add to Misplaced Pages again even if I learn the world is coming to an end..peace.

Ouch, all I did was give you some advive about conforming to the format of current events. No need to go overboard. The story was interesting, but far too long to be posted where it was. --GraemeL 16:24, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Spam Bobby131313?

I must say I have strong issues with you classifying my links as spam. Every single link I added is DEAD ON relevant to the page and contains a huge amount of information relevant to the page that would not be appropriate to add to the page. Deleting them is doing your readers a huge disservice.

As far as not linking to your own website, I'm sure 90% of the external links on here came from their owners. Just because they're your own doesn't mean they're not appropriate.

As far as no links to commercial sites, again most of the external links on here are commercial sites. I don't sell anything on my site as Peter suggested. I have some affiliates, but do not sell from my site.

I find it interesting that people have thanked me, then you come along and remove them. As far as content, I have added content, made corrections, and uploaded a lot of my own photos for anyone to use. I also had planned to do new pages for the commemoratives, not sure now.

http://commons.wikimedia.org/Category:United_States_commemoratives

Bobby 20:20, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Adding links to the same site across close to 100 articles is nothing but spam. I didn't class your site as commercial, but adding that many links to every article remotely related to the subject is nothing but blatant self promotion. --GraemeL 20:30, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

There was 1 link per article. There was nothing "remotely" related, they were extremely related. Here is one you deleted...

http://www.coincommunity.com/us_coin_links/us_dollars_morgan.asp

from this page....

http://en.wikipedia.org/Morgan_Dollar

If you go to that link, it is dedicated to Morgan Dollars. From there a user can click one link and find the mintages, compositions, photos, and more for specific year and mint Morgans. This is not information that is practical for an encyclopedia. All the links were like this. Extremely targeted, non-practical for inclusion here, and beneficial. Bobby 20:42, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I didn't mean that your links were not related to the subject, I meant that you added links to every Misplaced Pages article on the subject. Please feel free to add links to the site to one or two of the articles on the subject (perhaps Coin and Numismatics) but don't spam them across all articles on the subject. --GraemeL 20:47, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I guess I just don't understand this statement...

**but don't spam them across all articles on the subject**

It doesn't make sense that it's spam, when each link is exactly relevant to the page it's on, and contains extensive information on the relevant subject that is not practcal to include in Misplaced Pages. If I were running the show, I would consider them excellent links for my readers. Bobby 20:57, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I don't beleive what bobby is doin is spam. He made a pointed effort to create simple links for each coin type available(of which there are many). If his info was needed by someone, but it wasn't on that one page cause he could only be limited by say 2 links thruout all of wikipedia, that user would never find the info they need. It's the same as say adding los alamos to every chemical element page. Joe I 22:07, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

They were links to his own site, not a recognised authority on the subject. It was blatant self promotion to spam them across every article remotely related to the subject. --GraemeL 22:31, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

By that logic, you would need to delete every forum link in external links. None of these people are recognized authorities. Who decides if it's a "recognized authority"? All the facts on our site are taken straight from the Redbook. Pretty authoritative if you ask me.

You keep saying "blatant self promotion" which couldn't be further from the truth. We want to educate collectors to make the hobby safer. Period. My wife is President of Coinaf.org, all we want to do is help.

Let me ask you this, if someone else besides me, saw my site and posted links to it, would you still delete them? Since I didn't post them? I think we're getting a little lost as to what the goal of Misplaced Pages is. My links help users find the information they're looking for without linking to information that could just be added as content. That's the goal right? Bobby 22:43, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

Anybody adding the number of links that you added would be reverted for spamming if they had no history of contributions to the project other than adding external links. If a user with a history of useful contributions had added them, they might have been accepted, but just showing up and spamming links to a single site is never going to be acceptable.

I do regularly hit random articles and clear out the worst of the bad links, but there are over 1 million articles and only so many people cleaning out the spam (certainly a lot ferwer than the number adding it). I tackle it where I come across it and yours is just one of the cases that I happened to find. --GraemeL 22:53, 6 April 2006 (UTC)

I do see your point, I dislike the external links getting out of hand, which is how I came across bobby in the first place. Unfortunatly, there is no real "recognized authority" in this feild, and everyother coin website is out for their own good. I see a need for his content and accesibility. Just lettin you know, I'm gonna put his links back up. I will veiw everyone for relevency, tryin to widdle down a few. Joe I 01:20, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

"there is no real 'recognized authority' in this field" actually, I think you'll find CoinFacts.com is the best recognized source for this information.

Wow, that's just wrong, removing the original and inserting the copy! http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Peace_Dollar&diff=47351310&oldid=47256502 Coinfacts.com pre-dates Coincommunity.com by years, and the data is identical. Oh, and if you're thinking that the data on Coincommunity.com is more useful because of the grading information, think again it's a word for word copy of the Red Book.

It all came from the Red Book. Nothing wrong with that. Where do you think CoinFacts got their info from? We also have the histories, with permission, which CoinFacts doesn't have. All in all, ours is more comprehensive. CoinFacts has sale info that we don't, that hasnt deen updated in years, so its outdated any way. Also note that I didn't remove CoinFacts, I'll let the established members here sort it out. Bobby 12:51, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'm glad you at least admit that the content on your website is not original. However, the argument that your website deserves dozens of links from Misplaced Pages because you've copied more unoriginal content than anyone else is just absurd. If the content is not under copyright, then the obvious solution is to include it directly into Misplaced Pages itself. If the content is under copyright, then that's even worse. Peter

I didn't accuse you of removing links to sites that may be considered competitors. I saw no evidence of such actions in your contributions and was only objecting to the volume of links to the same site.

OK, as an established contributor has reinstated your links, I'll let them stand for the moment. Though an answer to the question about copyright of the content seems to be needed. If you have permission to publish the extracts from the red book, or the book is released under some form of free license, then this is not a problem. If you do not have permission, then the links will have to be removed again as it is a violation of Misplaced Pages policy to link to sites that publish information in violation of copyright. If you can clear this up, I'll consider the matter closed. --GraemeL 13:19, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

The information on our facts pages is just that, facts. There is nothing that would fall under copyright protection. It's simply mintage numbers, composition percentages, and the like. 90% of the photos are my own, the rest are used with permission and credit given. I know according to law that coin photos cannot be copyrighted, but I do not agree with the law, so I won't just take them. The grading standards are just that, grading standards, they don't fall under copyright as they are subjective. Anyone can agree with them or not agree with them. They are just statement of opinion. The histories are used with permission granted to publish on my website, not to redistribute, so I can't use them here. Credit is given on every page as required by the terms of permission. None of the facts, as stated earlier would be practical for an encyclopedia, hence they are an ideal area to be linked.

Thanks GraemeL & Joe, I'm now off to make some Commemorative pages for the Wiki. Bobby 14:14, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Bobby. I'm glad we got things sorted out. Enjoy editing Misplaced Pages. --GraemeL 14:22, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Adding links to your own website, commercial or not, is not acceptable in Misplaced Pages. As a Misplaced Pages editor, it is a clear conflict of interest. Kaldari 21:50, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #2

Canada vandalism

sorry, i didn't mean to vandalise, I was showing a co-worker how to edit wikipedia .. I'll use the sandbox next time. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 198.103.172.9 (talk • contribs) .

Glad to hear it. Enjoy editing Misplaced Pages. --GraemeL 14:53, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

insidetheweb.com

its a good site ,you can talk about it , thank you .

If the content is an mp3 of a radio show, then it's almost certainly a violation of the station's copyright. If it is, then Misplaced Pages does not allow linking to such content. If you can provide evidence that the site owns the copyright to the radio show contents, then you can link to it. --GraemeL 23:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi Graeme. I agree with you... so how come, when I brought up the vast number of links to pirated MP3s here (scroll down) at WP:AN/I, no one was interested? Is userspace exempt? · rodii · 00:37, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I missed that. AN/I accumulates changes so fast, it's hard to keep on top of everything there. Might be worth posting something to Jimbo's talk page about it. You know how he feels about copyright. Protecting the project is a major priority. If you can get a comment out of Jimbo, it might garner some support for a cleanup. --GraemeL 00:41, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

hi ,,, mp3!!!!!!!!!!!! ,which mp3 please visit the site , its a free weblog community ...!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Spam watchlist

OK, I can start organizing your watchlist now. Would a table format:

work for you? TheJabberwock 00:58, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. I added a comments column and changed the user link to be contributions. This will look much better, but still allow me to highlight and open multiple contributions pages at once. Probably best to change the instructions to add new spammers to the top of the list too. --GraemeL 11:45, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Hi. Looks good to me too. You'll notice I sorted the list by date of most recent edit, which is I think the more useful way which was intended. I have some other assorted comments. 1) Is the date-added column necessary or useful? 2) I find the URLs handy as they can help to track back links from Misplaced Pages through Google and Yahoo - but obviously we don't want the links themselves and I find t_h_i_s__f_o_r_m_a_t a bit unwieldy. Perhaps something could go in the instructions. 3) I do not think the time is very useful as we are usually looking at protracted or repeat spam campaigns. 4) It would seem useful to somehow associate associated spammers (eg this and this). 5) Can we also get some guidelines about when to add spammers to the list. I could have tripled the size of it if I had put in every spammer I've come across. There are some on the list with only one edit, or only one day of editing. I think it is a good idea to separate those who are spammer for a day from those who are long term problems. rgds. -- Linkspamremover 22:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for doing the sorting. I was going to be lazy and just wait for that to happen organically.

I thought the date added would be useful to see how long the listing had been around, but now you mention it, it may not be needed.

It should be OK to add the URLs to the comments if you miss out the http:// part. Mediawiki won't turn them into links without then and they will be easy to c&p into whatever you want to use for research.

I was going to treat the last seen column a bit freely and just update it with ~~~~~ rather than the correct time. That is close enough for an indicator without having to copy it from the contributions.

Let me think on ideas for linking them, a way of doing it doesn't spring to mind at the moment.

I usually don't add to the list unless I catch somebody that's been doing multiple spam runs. For new spammers, I usually only add them to the list if it gets to the stage that I have to give them a {{spam3}} warning. I normally have half a dozen tabs left open in Firefox of IPs that I have warned in the last few days and I suspect that they might come back, but they haven't done enough to warrant adding to the list yet. Recidivists, IP hoppers, and those that ignore multiple warnings are the ones that should be added.

Keep up the good work. --GraemeL 22:30, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Instead of date added, how about we make an entry each time the address spams using ~~~~~?

Also, a warning level column would be useful. A certain level would probably be the best guideline for when to add an address.

In terms of links, maybe we should just write out the period - e.g., "spamsite DOT com" - since writing out the full link might help a SEO campaign. I don't know whether my suggestion would. User:Taxman would probably know, since he's gotta be an expert on SEO by now.

Proposed changes:

Also, why is the linking useful? TheJabberwock 23:09, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

I think the warning level would just add too much to keep updated. There is a link to the talk page and block log from the contributions page, so it's easy enough to move around with a few clicks to get the full picture.

I'm almost certain that search engines wont follow links that aren't properly formatted, so I don't see entries like spammerslatestdomain.com being a problem. I've certainly never seen a crawler on any of my sites tring to follow plain text URLs.

Two dates in one column is starting to get a bit complicated as well, I would rather keep it as simple as possible. If it starts getting a pain to update, people will be less likely to use it.

By linking, I was meaning some way to show that different addresses/usernames are actually the same spammer with multiple identities. --GraemeL 23:18, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

If you are updating the date, wouldn't updating the warning level be easy? It would be simple to change the number from test3 to test4.

I asked User:Taxman about SEO; we'll see what he thinks.

Two dates in one column is the only solution I can think of for an easy way to indicate how big of a problem the spammer is. Do you think we should just keep the latest date? TheJabberwock 04:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Layout

I'm still not convinced of the need for the warning level, though the two dates in a single column is growing on me. What about this?:

by User:GraemeL - TheJabberwock 17:11, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I like the double date. Maybe major problems could be bolded instead of including the warning level:

TheJabberwock 17:11, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

I like the bold for major problems. Keeps it siple and makes them visible. --GraemeL 17:19, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Page protection

I noticed that you do a fair amount of page protection. Consider adding this to your JS script. It certainly will speed things up.Voice-of-All 03:34, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Nice stuff. Unfortunatly, my JS is already a factor in slowing down my WP activities. I think adding more at this point would just make things worse for me. :-( --GraemeL 11:48, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Breast Implants

Thank you for editing and reverting a change back to the edit written by the previous editor (s). The topic of that section is "Risks & Controversy" so there is no reason to change the heading "Systemic Illness" to "Alleged Connective Tissue Disease & Systemic Illness". David has helped organize the section and the vandal editor destroyed that organization. You also reverted back to an edit by epidemiologist Diana. That is most helpful. The vandal had simply deleted reference to an FDA study.Jgwlaw 14:56, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Any anon removing large sections of referenced text without comments as to why is likely to be reverted. --GraemeL 15:04, 8 April 2006 (UTC)

insidetheweb.com (2)

hi you say about insidetheweb.com : "If the content is an mp3 of a radio show, then it's almost certainly a violation of the station's copyright. If it is, then Misplaced Pages does not allow linking to such content. If you can provide evidence that the site owns the copyright to the radio show contents, then you can link to it. --GraemeL (talk) 23:23, 7 April 2006 (UTC) "

but insidetheweb.com: free weblogs community which lets users set up their own discussion boards.

i want to know if you can link to it to http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Weblog_software under developer hosted section

thank you.

Oops, sorry. I missed your earlier question overnight.

My answer above was to a question about a specific mp3 that was being linked to in an article. The mp3 was probably a copyright violation and so it was against policy to allow the mp3 to be linked to, not ageneral prohibition against the site.

The weblog software article gets a lot of spam, so if you link to the site from that article, it is almost certain to be removed. The best thing to do is to see if the site meets our notability guidelines at WP:WEB. If it does, then you can create an account and create an article about the site and link to that article in a similar way to the other articles on the list at weblog software. If you don't want to create an account, you can propose an article for creation at Misplaced Pages:Articles for creation. Hope this helps. --GraemeL 15:58, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Edit conflict on Tourism

I was trying to revert the linkspam on Tourism. It looked to me like it didn't take as you had beat me to it. My edit did not show at the time in the History tab. It seems though that my revert did get applied and reverted your edit back to the linkspam. Someone else caught it, though. -- Donald Albury 18:11, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

No problem. I noticed when it was reverted again and worked out that your edit and mine had somehow gotten the spam back into the article. --GraemeL 18:13, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Re: Petertdavis

Just to let you about a section I added about this gentleman on WP:AN/I, someone with whom you've exchanged a word or two. I'd appreciate your input there. -- llywrch 02:13, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I'll have a look. --GraemeL 12:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Usernomics

Hello GraemeL,

You asked that I not place a link to Usernomics on the Usability page. I now understand that commercial advertisiing is not appreciated. However, the link I am trying to place there is for a large list of Usability Resources and for Usability News. It is not too different from other links on that page such as Usability Views and Human Factors International.

I think readers looking for information about usability would want to have a source such as this.

I was trying to fix my error by removing any mention of consulting and focusing on a non-commercial resource page.

Is that still a problem or can I proceed?

Thanks,

Dr. Robert Kaplan email address removed to prevent spam

My main objection was that you were adding the same link to a large number of articles. I see you went back and added it to a smaller section all directly related to the primary focus of the site, but they were removed again by another user. The primary purpose of the site still remains commercial and that may be perceived as a problem by a lot of our contributors. You are obviously very experienced in the field, if you could add content to our articles, rather than adding links, the project could benefit greatly from your input. --GraemeL 12:19, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Magazine spam

I understand about commercial links, but why am I not allowed to post an article, such as the one about Annie Duke, when other posters, like the Columbia College post, can put up articles about her? If I didn't write the name of the magazine, would it be allowed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 204.9.196.14 (talk • contribs) .

you are adding links to a single site across every article we have on the subject. That is nothing but spamming. Please make content contributions rather than adding links. --GraemeL 15:02, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

I understand that, but they are all different links and articles, each related specifically to the person or topic. Poker Babes puts up a profile for every poker person, why am I not allowed to put up articles and interviews?

Then summarise any useful information from the magazine to the articles in your own words. Link spamming will only end up with you being blocked. I caught you, I didn't catch whoever the other spammer was. --GraemeL 15:07, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Over the past couple weeks, a ton of links to All In have been added, and left in. Some of these today were ridiculous though, like linking to an article where a series of players talk about trivial stuff. Some All In articles certainly should be linked, but this self-centered promotional behavior is what it is, especially in this case after seeing the triteness of the links. Also, trying to mask illegitimate behavior by dishonestly attacking something legitimate is the last refuge of a spammer. 2005 20:14, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Indeed. I started to have a look at some of the articles, but trying to separate the spam from the ham was too much work for me at the moment and I got tempted to just nuke most of the links. I know you're interested in the subject, so you might want to go through some of them if/when you have the time. --GraemeL 20:20, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Thank you!

Ahh, thanks for the barnstar! My first one :D I used to do that sort of thing all the time (I've been sort of inactive for a while), but no one ever gave me a barnstar for it :D

Hell, if I aint to good at writing articles, I might as well help newbies right :D Cheers Oskar 15:48, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

you're welcome. Keep up the good work. --GraemeL 15:49, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Europe

Sorry, but you are the one to stop vandalizing here. I'm doing a PhD in European Geography and there is no serious geograph considering Turkey's borders with Syria and Iran the borders of Europe. If wikipedia's goal is to give correct, accepted information, that thing is crap and should be removed.

Go get a little bit more knowledge before accusing a constributor of being a vandal.

Then please fill out the edit summary box when making the change. Any edit that is not from a logged in account that removes content without explanation is liable to be reverted as vandalism. Filling out the edit summary box with the reason for the change greatly reduces the chances of such changes being reverted. --GraemeL 16:28, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Ok, then I need to learn how to use this tool more properly, sorry. I was not aware of those editing restrictions/internal rules. My mistake here. But please understand that no normal person wants to be called a vandal with no justification. It's offending language. It could cause you trouble with other users as well. But I hope it's all clear now. Thanks for answering and reconsidering.

You must understand the huge volume of vandalism that occurs when anyone is allowed to edit. I do a lot of patrolling for vandalism and spam and I am not immune to making mistakes. It was a standard template that has been agreed upon by the community that I added to your page and I removed it after your first post here. You might want to create an account if you plan on being a regular contributer. Enjoy editing Misplaced Pages. --GraemeL 16:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Barnstar for link spam removal

Thanks for keeping Misplaced Pages spam-free! Keep up the good work! Kaldari 21:57, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! --GraemeL 21:58, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

I had revert vandalism to WW2 Casualties by IP 207.73.183.6, they seem to be serial vandals--Woogie10w 22:14, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

It's a school IP address. Nothing but vandalism from it recently though, so I blocked it again. --GraemeL 22:29, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Reverting links in Baby carrier

Issue is, there are links to specific sites, about how to use their specific products. The links are not to sites about babywearing. I had previously added links to other non-listed sites on this page, to sites with information about other baby carriers you do not have listed here, yet each time i do, you revert them.

For example, the link at the bottom to this page http://www.mayawrap.com/n_video.php is a link to a how to wear a mayawrap page, yet when I add a link to a how to wear a hugabub page, its deleted.

Why is one how to wear link kept, and another not?

Deletion

Thank you for your kind contibutions to the community.

Web Master

You've been blogged about

http://www.petertdavis.net/176-wikipedia-and-link-spammers-a-how-to-guide/ - Ta bu shi da yu 10:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I saw it posted to AN/I. Just makes me less likely to be talked out of removing links that have even the slightest whiff of spam about them. --GraemeL 11:25, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

removal of barcrawl site from pubcrawl topic

Hello,

As my edit of the barcrawl topic stated "link added again - why was this removed before?? Its a good pub crawl site". Why do you think it does not belong there? Yes it is a commercial site, but then if thats your feeling, why not remove all commercial links? I thought the idea was to put relevant external links in said section of articles. said website is a very relevant site to pub crawls.

Regards

Nick

The site is not good, it's new and has no content that adds to the article. There are too many commercial links to keep them all out of Misplaced Pages, I remove them where I find them and yours was one of those I happened to find. Most of your contributions have been adding external links. Please contribute to the content of the encyclopedia rather than adding external links. --GraemeL 14:10, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

The site is not good? Have you used the pub crawl map maker? No other site has such a useful facility. Other linked pub crawl makers are very basic in comparison. The site is also not new, its been going for a nearly two years now. Admittedly i had added several sites to external links, but only where i thought was relevant. -- Nick

So did you check the site? I guess not as even though your points are incorrect you've removed it again, without comment. Well someone else will probably add it in the future, best keep your eyes peeled.

testing times

I'm sorry, what? User:Zoe| 15:57, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

I was you testing and removing the tests from your user pages and though I would have a little joke. --GraemeL 15:58, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah. sorry, I was in dilemma mode. :) My contributions on anything other than namespace pages were not showing in "my cotributions", so I was testing edits in different namespaces. User:Zoe| 16:09, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Ah, that explains it. I couldn't think why somebody of your experience was running tests like those. --GraemeL 16:11, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Lodging and SEO Contest

Okay I understand the removal of the SEO contest link, sorta. I did leave this up in the discussion for 2 weeks asking for objections and got none so I added it. Its not my site but a friends.

The lodging wiki link I am confused about, again left it for discussion. Its non spam and a wiki open to anyone. Also this is not my site. I don't know who owns it. I just use it often and add resources to it. I would just like to understand how you are defining what it spam so I can avoid being on your radar forever and go about editing in my own fashion. Not being a regular editor to wikipedia I am just getting my feet wet here. I plan on adding content to other areas but now I'm worried about getting everything I do reverted.

You can leave the reply here or on my user talk, which might be a little easier since you have about 8 gajillion posts here. How the heck do you keep up with it? DrakesTravels

I've seen that wiki posted before and only removed it the first time around after having a good surf round it and deciding that it only had one or two entries on each subject after I had explored down around 5 or 6 category levels. It might be easier to evaluate and more worthwhile if the categories were less specific, or there was a way of seeing all of the articles at a higher level than the extremely specific categories. All-in-all, it could be a good resource in the future, I just don't think it is at the moment.

I removed the competition SEO link because it made my eyes bleed. :P

Don't worry about being reverted, have a look round the welcome message links that I posted to your talk page and you will soon get the hang of things.

Talk threads aren't too hard to keep track of once you work out how to use the history and diff functionality. --GraemeL 16:47, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Nutritional Supplements

I was under the assumption that 'external links' were links to sites with additional information on a specific topic. I added links to a website with additional information on specific topics, some of the artcles even being published in peer reviewed journals. The sites I linked to are not commercial, as are many other 'external links' which you evidently did not feel the need to delete. The information contained on the pages I linked to were just as relevant as that for other 'external links', and contain additional sources of scientifically acurate information on that topic, not related to commercial benefit.

I do not know why you feel the need to delete these.

All of your actions have been posting external links to a single site across a wide range of articles. That is nothing but an attempt to use Misplaced Pages to advertise the site in question. Please contribute content, not external links. --GraemeL 16:50, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

Why is my link spam??

Mr. Administrator, GraemeL,

Why did you revert my addition of a link to the law firm and lawyer pages? I spent countless hours of my own time, creating something that many students here at the University of Michigan Law School find very valuable. I don't make a penny on advertising and besides my time, it costs me each month to pay for my server. I'm doing a public service, and can't even put a link to it on Misplaced Pages?? Did you look at my site? If you're a law student or a member of a law firm, it's very useful, free information. I'm not selling anything. You seem to be going a little overboard.

You were adding links to your own site, which is against the guidelines at WP:SPAM. We get hundreds of additions per day to sites created with the sole intention of gaining Adsense revenue from Misplaced Pages links. I consider that your site is one of those. --GraemeL 20:41, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

What if I remove the Adsense ad?

OK, that sounds like a good compromise. --GraemeL 13:51, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

User:Brandubh Blathmac

I notice that you blocked this user indefinitely as a sockpuppet a few days ago, but he's somehow been posting again today. I assume there's some sort of technical error going on and thought you'd like to know. - dharmabum 23:06, 11 April 2006 (UTC)

vandal bot?

what>?

==Welcome to VandalProof== Thanks for your interest in VandalProof! You've been added to the list of authorized users, and feel free to contact me or post a message on VandalProof's talk page if you have any questions. AmiDaniel (Talk) 00:14, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

Thanks. --GraemeL 00:15, 12 April 2006 (UTC)

VandalProof 1.1 is Now Available For Download

Happy Easter to all of you, and I hope that this version may fix your current problems and perhaps provide you with a few useful new tools. You can download version 1.1 at User:AmiDaniel/VandalProof. Let me warn you, however, to please be extremely careful when using the new Rollback All Contributions feature, as, aside from the excessive server lag it would cause if everyone began using it at once, it could seriously aggitate several editors to have their contributions reverted. If you would like to experiment with it, though, I'd be more than happy to use my many sockpuppets to create some "vandalism" for you to revert. If you have any problems downloading, installing, or otherwise, please tell me about them at User:AmiDaniel/VP/Bugs and I will do my best to help you. Thanks. AmiDaniel (Talk) 06:45, 16 April 2006 (UTC)

Happy Easter

Everyone else seems to have stolen all the good Easter pictures and stuff, but I wish you a Happy Easter all the same. — FireFox • T

Self-Harm page

Self Harm page

Hi there, I'm getting in touch as you've done recent work on the self-harm article. I've done a fair bit of study on this subject recently, so reckon I'm in a position to go through and get a good load of citations in there. What I propose, is moving to using the ref tag to make this easier, and then I'll go through and get citations in, and replace some of the "some people" type areas with referenced viewpoints, trying to get multiple view is where there are opposing views. Obviously this'll involve a bit of rewriting and adding so I wondered if you have any feedback on this before I start. Acidsaturation 07:46, 21 April 2006 (UTC)

Need your help

Hi GraemL,

Do u remember me...Ashvidia!!! dude

Ok I have created an article Atmospheric water generator. Now me being an ametuer wiki'an need your help to refine the article so as to make it fit to be featured on wiki. Pl help me in formating the text and pictures positioning etc.

Awaiting your prompt response and action. email me at ashvidia@gmail.com

Regards,

Ashvidia 08:40, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Mega Spam additions

I don't have that admin ability to revert multiple spams in one swoop. Perhaps you will revert all these http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Special:Contributions&target=69.148.171.230 Some of these links would be okay, but this sleazy spam inserted links to one site above links to official sites, top of the lists. It should all just be reverted. If you can do that, great. 2005 21:15, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

Someone already took care of it. 2005 22:55, 22 April 2006 (UTC)

vandalism

i'm sorry for the vandalism. it will not happen again. --AAL 13:31, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Old Skool Esperanzial note

Since this isn't the result of an AC meeting, I have decided to go Old Skool. This note is to remind you that the elections are taking place now and will end at 23:50 UTC on 2006-04-29. Please vote here. Thanks. --Celestianpower 20:42, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Esperanza Newsletter, Issue #3

User talk:65.170.120.66

Only vandalism by this IP since your last block. Please block indef. --Matthead 17:19, 9 May 2006 (UTC)

User:81.155.183.131

Any chance you can look at the recent edits / additions by 81.155.183.131 and see if you can "improve" matters. Fraslet 18:59, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Breakout Article

http://en.wikipedia.org/search/?title=Breakout&action=history

204.13.83.197, the IP for WorldLingo translator, should be banned. It can act as a proxy. Please revert. -Lappy512 15:40, 11 May 2006 (UTC)

I tested it on my own sandbox and I agree, it is effectively an open proxy. I've blocked it as such. --GraemeL 14:46, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the revert of the vandalism to my user page and the block on the vandal IP. Best, Gwernol 14:35, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for helping fight the vandals. --GraemeL 14:45, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

Hey dude you keep deleting my edits on prog rock festivals. Nearfest is a NEO prog fest and featured the bands i added . Whats up? Rick

Why did you remove my link?

I am owner of Atkins All The Way support forum. I had my site listed under the Atkins Nutritional Approach article last year. I am doing some maintenance today and found that my link had been deleted. I added it, then a few hours later, you proceeded to delete it again.

How can other Atkins boards that have been around the same or less be linked by the Atkins Nutritional Approach article but not me. I am just as valid and provide support for those on Atkins. I understand the need for objectivity in the Wiki article so I choose to avoid editing the text as I am extremely pro-Atkins, but I'm adding my link for people that would like to get help advice or a place to rant about Atkins. I would respect if you would leave my link alone in the future. My site is non-profit as opposed to many other sites linked in the article.

204.153.88.7 17:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I've posted a standard warning message to your talk page explaining the removal. Please add content, not external links to articles. Adding links to your own site is also specifically against policy. --GraemeL 17:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I understand your thinking, but my site is not spam, I am not selling a single thing on my site, it's a forum for Atkins support for those on Atkins. The fact that you remove my forum, yet leave everyone else's there shows me that you are either a competitor for traffic or you think you know more about my site than you do. I've deleted every support forum as they to "violate policy."

The only reason we post on Wiki as an external link is that support forums help people that choose to be pro-Atkins. You have plenty of links pointing to commercial sites that are deploring Atkins and sell items on their sites. Is this some attempt to swing the article Anti-Atkins? 204.153.88.7 17:44, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

No, it's an attempt to stop people spamming the wiki. I caught you, not the others. Live with it. --GraemeL 17:45, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

GraemeL, I respectfully disagree even though you try to reduce me to a scheming, marketing, spamming shrew. You provide links to sites like Atkins Diet Alert, created by the Physicians committee for responsible medicine, this organization is funded by PETA and gives the article an anti-Atkins slant. There is discussion about thearticle itself being biased towards Atkins yet the links you allow even it out.

About your "I caught you, not the others. Live with it." You didn't catch me at anything. I've had my link on the article for years and it was deleted between January and now. Yet all other sites providing a place for Atkineers to congregate were allowed to remain. I'm really not sure what your agenda is. You say you're against vandals and spammers an I am in 100% agreement with you. In this case, you are wrong. Maybe if I took the time to get a screename you wouldn't call me a spammer. Let me go do that, I had one a few years ago but forgot the name and password. 204.153.88.7 17:55, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I caught you adding a link to your own site which is specifically against Misplaced Pages policy. I do not have any axe to grind about the article in question. The only reason that I watch it is that it gets a lot of spam. I'm likely to call anybody who only adds links without actually contributing anything to the project a spammer, registered or not.

I do see that you've removed the "resource" links from the article. That's probably the best solution to balance it out. I was going to add a tag to get somebody interested in the subject to take a detailed look at the links, but you removing the section kind of trumped that. I wont be adding them back in. --GraemeL 18:01, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

There, I created a new account. Let's clean up the article and remove all the links. It's only fair. BrianZ 17:57, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

I posted a welcome message to your new talk page. Please do not remove all of the links from the article. however, do feel free to go through them and evaluate them and then remove the ones that are commercial, or of low quality. --GraemeL 18:04, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

That's fair and if that's the consensus, I'm okay with that. I just want you to know that I'm not a spammer. I would add every low carb forum if I came upon this article without any listed because there are so many people doing Atkins wrong and it gives it a bad name. Sites like mine and atkins diet bulletin board help them do it correctly and get better results, it's not about spam at all. I could care less about Google rank actually. I just want to help people that want to do Atkins, do it right. I'm not going to delete "all" I'm just going to delete extremist sites like Peta sponsored Physicians Group for Responsible Medicine and other PETA agenda sites.

Have a good day BrianZ 18:08, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

ISP block

Thanks for the heads-up. An hour will probably be fine. Sarge Baldy 18:33, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah well. They'll get tired eventually. Sarge Baldy 18:34, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Andrew´s page

Hello, dear GraemeL. I¡äm writing to you because I have just written an article about Ferdinand Anton Ernst Porsche. You may check it and write me back about your opinion. Anytime. --AndresArce 20:05, 15 May 2006 (UTC)AndrewArce

Hi. You probably picked me because I have edited several Porsche articles. I don't have any real interest in the subject and was pretty much just chasing down spammers. I did have a quick look at your changes it seems that you've made great improvements to the article. I hope you manage to find somebody with more knowledge of the subject to give you a better critique. --GraemeL 20:14, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

It´s OK. Thank You. --AndresArce 20:15, 15 May 2006 (UTC)AndrewArce

Mechanix Ilustrated - link spam

You sent me a message regarding the link I added to Mechanix Illustrated. The site I linked to was my own, but I linked it because it contains scans of scores of mechanix illustrated articles. I thought that this would be of interest to someone interested in Mechanix Illustrated. Likewise I'm at a loss as to why the link I posted on Subliminal Advertising

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/03/14/subliminal-advertising/

which is actually an article about the first cases of subliminal advertising, is considered linkspam. When this link:

http://www.scientificpsychic.com/graphics/index.html

which has nothing whatsoever to do with the topic, is not.

Anyway I'm sorry if I violated the TOS of Misplaced Pages, I hadn't realized that was what I was doing. I will refrain posting any relevant links in the future.

-Charlie

thanks for understanding. Having looked at the other link, I tend to agree. I was patrolling recent changes when I spotted your link, not looking at any article specifically. I'll remove that link from the article too. --GraemeL 22:35, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

Video Poker 247

Hi,

Can I actually say I did not add 2 links to the same site Video Poker 247 only 1 link on the video poker page. I actually thought the site to be worthy of a listing on the video poker page.

The other link I added was History of Slots to the Slot Machine page.

Just thought I would clarify.

Thanks Excel32

I didn't think it was good enough for inclusion. On the other hand, I didn't think it was bad enough to warn you about spamming. ;-) --GraemeL 00:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Clinical depression

Hi Graeme -

The source of the material I used was from a Canadian Mental Health public service handout. It was not copied verbatim; I paraphrased it. If there is a copyright issue here, it is not from me. Thanks for asking! Denni ☯ 03:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Denni. I was already pretty sure that our version was the original and the other site was a copy of WP text. --GraemeL 11:32, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

messages on my talk page

Thanks for the note, but I wasn't trying to indent the paragraphs. I tried to set quotes apart from my text by using a single space before the paragraph (since that places the quote in a box). However this prevented my text from wrapping to the page, so I just went with italics instead. --Ryan Wise 15:01, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. Glad you got the formatting sorted out. --GraemeL 15:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Yikes

Sorry about that, I hate to trample on other admins that keep up with their protections. Most likely, someone requested it at RFP; I've been pretty lax about pruning through the protected pages lately! · Katefan0 /poll 15:35, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Not a problem. I'd rather somebody went through the list regularly and cleaned it out instead of having pages protected for weeks on end when a few days would have been good enough. --GraemeL 15:38, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

Pokeno website link

Sorry Graham, I saw all the other links to comercial sites and assumed it was ok. We are developing our site at the moment and will be incorporating features on pie history, facts and figures, and links to pie related material. If it includes valuable information such as this would there be any objections to posting a link then?86.144.207.225 15:51, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

No problem. Thanks for stopping when asked. I went through the articles you edited and weeded out all of the other commercial links too. As to your future content, it would all depend on what the content was and whether it added to the information already in the articles. Best idea is to post a request asking for some opinions to the article talk page once you have expanded the content on the site. --GraemeL 15:59, 16 May 2006 (UTC)