|
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Amalfi Coast. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.- Gilliam 10:26, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. -- Gogo Dodo 10:45, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from any site that uses the MediaWiki spam blacklist, which includes all of Wikimedia and Wikipedia. 〈REDVEЯS〉 11:06, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may place {{unblock}} on your user talk page to have the block reviewed. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. ~ Arjun 18:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC) ~ Arjun 18:36, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
Gerardo1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Please explain your actions,it is clear you have not read all the contributions
Decline reason:
Sorry I don't feel that I can ublock you at this time, you have consistantly added spam links numerous times, and doing so after numerous warnings. You were blocked for spam -- ~ Arjun 19:31, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Gerardo1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have NOT constantly added spam (i only joined this morning),numberous times and have NOT received numberous warnings.I have aded CORRECT information and NOTt spam is very useful.i added the OFFICIAL State Run Amalfi Coast Tourist Office Website and the CORRECT Website for Amalfi Accommodation.
Decline reason:
I can look up and see the warnings, so saying you didn't get them seems somewhat odd. You added sorted links and email addresses, wikipedia is not a Tourist guide or link farm. Please read the external links policy. If you agree to abide by that policy, then your unblock request can be reconsidered. --pgk 20:15, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Gerardo1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
original unblock reason
Decline reason:
See above. -- Sandstein 21:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
As I have stated clearly I have added external links that are totaly apppropriate and are not spam therefore the 3 warnings were not required or indeed justified.If you had any knowledge of the subject in question AMALFI then you would know that it is a major tourist destinatiom.The external links that I added (and that were incorrectly deleted) are fine and not spam.You have made an error and blocked my access wrongly.If you do not have the local knowledge then do not get involved.Power has gone to your head and there is no excuse for your ignorance.Look at the other external links and tell me which are not commercial !.If you need any further clarification then email me.This is my first experience (day 1) of using Wikipedia and you have totally destroyed my faith in it by your total ignorance of the subject you are dealing with and your total lack of common sense and heavy handed approach.
Gerardo1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
original unblock reason
Decline reason:
See above. Do not repeat unblock requests. Your talk page is now protected. -- Sandstein 21:53, 11 February 2007 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
I have abided by the external links policy and will continue to do so however if I am to add to the Wikipedia experience I must be allowed to edit positively and not be pulled up at every opportunity by those with extremely limited knowledge of the subject I am interested in.You have followed like a shep in block my access without examing the facts.
I only repeated my originsal posts due to my ignorance of how the system works and rather than repeating them I now know how the system works (or does not work).
What a complete jobsworth
