You've probably come here because I reverted one of your links. Below are several arguments that spammers usually make on my talk page. Let's play:
Spammer Bingo
Please choose your argument if I reverted your spam.
1. This is a new and exciting product or service and the community needs to know about it. Response: You should consider an advertising budget. I have little confidence in a product or service whose business strategy is predicated on free Wikipedia advertising.
2. There are other commercial links on the page, what do you have against mine? Response: It's still spam. If there are other commercial links on the page, delete them. But if you put your link back, I am deleting it.
3. Anyone reverting my links must be a shill for my competitor. Response: Yes that's it. Based on all the spam reversions I do, I am actually on the payroll of over 5,000 organizations worldwide. My total income generated from this job is over $10 million a year. So you should consider doing what I do rather than spamming for your piddling little product.
4. This isn't advertising, it's knowledge. How is knowledge spam? Response: If it was really knowledge, you would have entered some of that knowledge into the article. Clearly your aim is not education, but making sure that your link is seen.
5. I have a right to be on Wikipedia. Response: You are permitted to do many things on Wikipedia to make it better. You are generally not allowed to advertise. Further about rights, I am only aware of the United States Constitution and Wikipedia spamming isn't really mentioned. If you can point to the relevant passage in your home country's constitution or declaration of human rights, then I shall allow you to spam.
6. I concede the link is commercial, but it has some content so it should stay. Response: You may find this to be a surprise, but I do give consideration to these circumstances and review the material on the link to make a decision. Before you come crying to me, consider these things. Does your content consist of two paragraphs which are more or less a basic definition or description? Does your content discuss why your particular brand is superior in the context of discussing the subject? Is your content already in the article and written by a non-commercial source? If your answer is yes, I will probably revert you. If it is no, let's discuss. If you come here and use reasons 1-5 as your main argument, you are wearing away any benefit of the doubt that I was willing to concede.
7. Now that you have read this, you need to go back to the beginning and read the external link guidelines and How not to be a spammer. If you had read this earlier, you might not have gotten your link reverted.
8. Why are you being so mean? Response: Because of the undying affection of my fan club. Folks like User207.134.157.248 who likes to spam for hotel booking sites and User:Examcoach who spams his audio books. Of course, There is also User:93.173.34.220. We aren't sure what his beef is, but he is from Israel and really loves my work. This guy is also from Israel and loves my work. Did I show up at a Palastinian fundraiser by mistake? A new addition to the spammer hall of fame represents a hedge fund that he wanted to spam. When the powers that be deleted his article, he attempted to delete some very notable ones in revenge. And there is this person who wants to carry out his personal grievances on Wikipedia. We are assuming he does this because he can't afford a lawyer.
Thanks guys, your love makes it all worthwhile.