Goskan
Hello Margaret,
External links that do not serve as a citation (see WP:CITE) for any of the content in the article do can be removed at any time and for a variety of reasons. Wikipedia is in need of more content for its articles, not more external links. As the Wikipedia is aiming for a print version, EL's do not help Wikipedia very much. If you see other links on various articles that don't belong, they should be removed as well. Just because someone hasn't gotten around to fully evaluating such links doesn't mean we have an obligation to host your site.
Please refer to WP:SPAM. It is primarily this guideline (along with WP:EL) that I go by when removing external links. The section entitled "How not to be a spammer" in particular should help explain why I am removing your links. If you feel your link is useful for a particular article, refer to point 6 of that section (using the talk page to discuss your link).
In the case of the Motorola link, that link has been discussed and agreed upon on the article talk page. It has consensus - which is the driving force here at Wikipedia that determines if any particular edit should stay or if it should go.
Also, regarding identification, Wikipedia discourages editors from providing personal information, as the content here not only shows up on Google fairly quickly, but is also mirrored, archived, and otherwise distributed fairly openly. All edits and contributions stand on their own weight; the credentials of an editor, no matter their expertise, are irrelevant here. Everyone's equal here.
Considering the above, I hope you'll understand if I don't provide personal information about myself. However as my first name is a part of my username, please feel free to call me Dan. Please feel free to go back and remove your information from my talk page if you'd like. --AbsolutDan (talk) 13:42, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
- You are welcome to remove your real name and other personal information from my talk page, but please leave the remainder of the messages intact. Thanks --AbsolutDan (talk) 01:53, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
You have removed content from both your own talk page and from the talk pages of articles because you disgree with the conversation. Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --AbsolutDan (talk) 00:12, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Your talk page edit
Please stop. If you continue to remove warning messages from your talk page, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --AbsolutDan (talk) 01:06, 10 July 2006 (UTC)
Final Message edit
On reflection I have nothing to hide. I made additions to Wikipedia with good intentions of providing links to good quality content (visit http://www.6sigma101.com/ for proof of that, the glossary is very comprehensive and useful for anyone involved in Six Sigma). I had NO INTENTION to spam as all links were to different, relevant content. 6sigma101 has only FREE, accessible resources. It has NO ADVERTIZING, just menu links to our courses on http://www.micquality.com/ site. In some cases the glossary has much more content than Wikipedia and we were considering to move some our copyrighted content into articles in Wikipedia. However, with the relentless hunting and putting spam label on us we no longer want to contribute to Wikipedia. We believe that the efforts of Wikipedia spam police should be focussed on people contributing links to advertizing and clearly sites with no free, relevant and useful content. I tried to remove all our contributions and our accounts but, unfortunately it was all restored against our will. However, as we have nothing to hide, and our entries have argued the suitability of our content for Wikipedia (as per our understanding of Wikipedia policies), we will not go through lengthy process of having them removed. We will no longer make any contributions. The founders and managers for MiC Quality and 6Sigma101.(Goskan 02:44, 10 July 2006 (UTC))