Edisonqv

Welcome!

Hello, Edisonqv, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Episteme: The Invisible College of Knowledge, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Prestonmag (talk) 22:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Episteme: The Invisible College of Knowledge

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Episteme: The Invisible College of Knowledge requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Prestonmag (talk) 22:34, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

March 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Baruch Spinoza do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. TeaDrinker (talk) 23:52, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. TeaDrinker (talk) 23:59, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for spamming or advertising. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. TeaDrinker (talk) 00:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Disagreement

Hello, Well first of all I would like you to look at my website http://www.episteme.pro.br. It is a web site aimed to philosophy mainly and also education and science. I agree that that you complain about the article Episteme: The invisible college of Knowledge would be against the purpose of Wikipedia and therefore I didn't try do create it again, I am sorry about that. But when it comes to the link I have added in the external links of some philosopher I don't see what is wrong, as we have tons of links like that, which are links to external resources to deep the resource about some article. Why you can link to Stanford Encyclopedia and many like that and not to my site? I am High School Philosophy Teacher and my website doesn't give me any money at all, only costs me some. Besides that, just as I got you message I didn't add anything else, and despite of that you have blocked me. That is very unfair! I hope to rear from you soon and I am very disappointed at your rude attitude. Regards,

Edison Queiroz Villela

I do apologize if I came off as rude. Wikipedia gets many, many additions of external links every day. For most articles, there are a wealth of possible links which would be relevant to the article. However if all were included, Wikipedia would become a directory of links rather than an encyclopedia. Thus we have to be very judicious in adding links. Making that determination means deciding that a link to be added, at the present time, is one of the very best resources on the web for that particular subject. Usually the owners of websites are a bit biased--they tend to think (quite reasonably) their website is or could be one of the best resources on a subject. However that's a judgement call which an independent editor should make. While I have no doubt that you're well-intentioned, I am not sure that you're the best person to make that judgement call. In fact, I think it represents a significant conflict of interest. However if you will refrain from adding links to your site to articles, I would be happy to unblock you. And if you want another administrator to review my block, feel free to add {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} to this page and someone else will review this case. Hope this helps, and again, I do apologize for coming across as rude. --TeaDrinker (talk) 19:15, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi TeaDrinker, Apologies accepted! I understand and agree with your argument. I do not intend to add links such as those to my website. I hope to able to contribute to Wikipedia differently. Regards

Edison

Fantastic, you are unblocked. If you have any questions, concerns, or other issues, feel free to drop me a note on my talk page (User talk:TeaDrinker. Thanks for your interest in the project. --TeaDrinker (talk) 19:26, 20 March 2012 (UTC)