Talk:Wall unit

Re: Removed external links

I have started two different topics in the wiki discussion/help area about this. Everyone agreed the links are useful and are NOT spam. And the cabinets in those pictures are not for sale as you stated. They are pictures of wall units I have finished. The units are owned by people, in their homes. They are in no way for sale.

I was encouraged by wiki users to create MORE pages like the one I have created here. I specifically started the thread when I first joined here to see what everyone thought. Everyone agreed that they are find and in no way spam or junk links. Also, you deleted the PDF link I added about how to make a raised panel door calling it spam too. Now how in the world is a tutorial on building a raised panel door spam? I work hard creating these things then have people calling it "spam" is not a good feeling. --Naples 17:51, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I'm the person who initially removed your link from this page. The main reason I did this was that I felt that they were added primarily to assist with your google page ranking. My thinking here is largely derived from posts on the digitalpoint.com forums discussing improving the page rank for the site in question. For example . . .

• • This post in which the user ly2 discusses page rank stats for his site jwpincorporated.com.

And then . . .

• • This post in which the same user talks about adding an external link to wikipedia articles to picture galleries in order to improve the page rank of the user's site.

To be perfectly clear, I don't believe that you (assuming you are the same person) are acting in bad faith. In the post you say that you're trying to help wikipedia along with your site. I believe you are sincere but there are still a couple of issues here. First, I do have an objection to wikipedia being used to increase page rank for a site. While it's not the worst thing you can do, it's not great either. Second, adding a link to a site you own is a problem. Here is a quote from the relevant section of Wikipedia:External links:

For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following, without exception.

A website that you own, maintain or are acting as an agent for; even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked to. This is in line with the conflict of interests guidelines. If it is a relevant and informative link that should otherwise be included, mention it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it.

So that's it in a nutshell. I don't believe that you're intentionally trying to harm wikipedia, and still I don't find these links to be appropriate.

Finally, I have neither the time nor the inclination to get into an edit war with you or anyone else over this. So, I will not be the next person to remove your links on the pages in question.

ScottW 23:35, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

"For policy or technical reasons, editors are restricted from linking to the following, without exception. A website that you own, maintain or are acting as an agent for; even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked to. This is in line with the conflict of interests guidelines. If it is a relevant and informative link that should otherwise be included, mention it on the talk page and let neutral and independent Wikipedia editors decide whether to add it."

Thats exactly what I did, everyone said to go for it, so I went forward with what I was doing. You can check for yourself in the help area where I started that thread. I would link to it but I can't figure out how to find it. =x

And look at my post from the forum, I'm not out trying to do harm. I clearly stated that you need to worry about helping wikipedia and adding quality links, anything that you benefit should always come second to wikipedia's interests. Is it really such a bad thing for me to benefit? I mean, look at the rest of the people that come and really do spam wiki with useless crap. At least I'm putting wikipedia interests before my sites interest.

I mean, I guess it doesn't really help my site any because there are no links pointing back at my main site, but whatever. It only takes a few min to do it, and it certainly cant hurt my sites ranking. And it actually ad's to the quality of the wiki community and particular page. It's a win/win situation. Maybe the next page I do, I will add a small link at the bottom that says "Back to homepage" or something. I'm going to keep playing with it and see what I can do. I think that if you're adding good stuff to the wiki, no ad's, no links or other crap, then your link will be accepted. I used to do the same thing as I'm doing now, only I would have the pictures displayed along with my sites template and links, the link would quickly be removed accompanied by a nasty note for the reason it was removed.

Hope this helps you.

Just remember, make sure the link is aimed at helping the wiki page, not your page. If you get a link on there, even if it has no links back to your main page, you still benefit. Just try to work FOR the wikipage, not for your page.

Also, yes my account is banned on that forum in case you didn't know. Me and another member got into a fight and exchanged "Personal Verbal Attacks" so we were banned. I'm allowed back in Jan. As you can already tell, I get upset and talk recklessly sometimes. =o

Also, I said it once, I will say it again. Go to this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wood_finishing Look at the external links there. Now, if my pages are considered spam, what in the world would you call those adsense filled links? It's utter crap, yet they stay posted. Seems like a bit of corruption or a double standard to me, but whatever.

--Naples 21:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

There's no corruption or double standard that I'm aware of. Wikipedia is just incredibly disorganized, and some things are seen and acted upon and others are not. There's a lot of inappropriate things on wikipedia, and you'd drive yourself insane if you went around trying to fix all of them. There are times where I wonder if it's worth it to bother with any of them. There are, however, a lot of people who spend a lot more time and effort doing this sort of thing than I do.

I very quickly checked those links on the article you cited and I didn't spot adsense links right off. It was a brief glance, so I may have missed them. In any case, I suspect that at least some of them shouldn't be there. But at the moment, I don't have time to look at them (life takes major precedence over wiki). If there are some you know to be inappropriate, then feel free to remove them. If someone disagrees with your removal then discuss it with them and others to get a consensus. Or don't. But know that there is no effort here to discriminate against your contributions in particular, or to allow other contributions that may be inappropriate. This is just how the whole things works. ScottW 23:09, 21 November 2006 (UTC)