ModaRazzi

I long ago gave up on wiki, not everyone needs your links. If anything I have been supporting you on MY publication which by the way IS google ranked 1 So honestly Im done with it. I dont need your links I dont need to steal your damn traffic. so feel free to delete this account because I wont be wasting my time helping wiki in even the slightest manner. BTW I will be removing all links and credits from my page ranked 1 site that points to wiki or ANY and ALL mention of your site. The internet is a network folks I dont need to steal anything from you. What is funny is that I have spoken with other editors, credible names in my industry and 9 out of 10 times the response was that wiki was a joke so to let you know thanks for proving them right. Goodbye

July 2008

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection 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 attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since 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 rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:06, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

Your note

There are a few basic Wikipedia tenets with which I'd like to acquaint you. It seems with the first version of your note, the primary one would be no personal attacks. Do not leave notes like the one you first left at my talk page, or at anyone else's talk page. It is rude, incivil and displays a complete lack of etiquette. Any further notes left, even if you change it right away, will be reported to the administrator's noticeboard for making unwarranted personal attacks.

Next, you are in fact promoting a product with your addition of links to your website across multiple articles, you are promoting your website. Coupled with your self-identification as being connected to the site you are linking, you are violating WP:SPAM and WP:EL#Links normally to be avoided. This is the third time you have been told that Wikipedia is not a collection of links. Further, because you are associated with this website, you have a conflict of interest in adding them. Finally, since you have already been warned about this by an adminstrator, you are on very tenuous ground in threatening me and warning me away from the articles you have spammed. Please see WP:OWN for clarification regarding such warnings. So, feel free to contact Wikipedia about this, by all means. In fact, I encourage you to go to Wikipedia:AN/I and post that big bad Wildhartlivie has removed your spam links. Meanwhile, please note the line below the edit box prior to saving changes, which says "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it." You have no ground on which to stand to threaten and harangue someone for removing spam. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:27, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

I am not the one whose initial contact with another editor was to call them a jackass. I am also not the only person who has removed your spam links from articles tonight or on earlier occasions.

I have given you specific Wikipedia policies which your spamming has violated. You are connected with this website, therefore your interest is with the website and not with Wikipedia. No one has questioned a copyright issue, there is none to be addressed. The issue is specifically that you, as either the webmaster, owner, employee or someone otherwise connected to ModaRazzi is interjecting links to the website into numerous articles, which violates policy. You have been warned on more than one occasion, by more than one editor, one of whom is an administrator. Before you attempt to return these links to articles, you would be best served by taking this site, as linked by you, a person who is representing the site, to the appropriate noticeboard for approval. Any other action is spamming and will be reported. There is no need for screenshots, nothing on Wikipedia is ever erased, it exists in the history of each page. Again, do not threaten me. I have broken no policies or guidelines in following standard procedure in dealing with someone who is spamming articles with links to a site with which he or she is associated. If these links are returned, a report will be made to the appropriate administrators noticeboard and you may well be blocked from editing. These are Wikipedia policies. It would behoove you to learn them.

Finally, WP:Talk procedure is to add new talk to the BOTTOM of the page, and you are required to sign your posts by typing ~~~~ four tildes. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Please note that using the userpage as a promotional page for a website or company is a violation of Wikipedia guidelines, specifically WP:UP#NOT #6. Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

re: Questions

None of this is a personal issue, nor is it an attempt to be difficult. There are just specific guidelines and policies regarding external links that are in place. I'm not sure which board to tell you to go to for approval of inclusion of your site. I will make some inquiries and see if I can find out which is the best, but that will have to wait until tomorrow as it is well past my bedtime. In the meanwhile, continued returning of the links could result in the website being placed on the spam blacklist and that fairly much means it is forever banned.

Regardless, the issue about the site isn't related to copyright, etc., and there is software in place to prevent links to bolster page ranking, so that isn't an issue. The issue as it stands at the moment is that from what I can tell, you own the page, and are adding links to it, which is a WP:CoI issue. The style.com links are there because other contributors have placed them, and they are, in general, specific. One way in which a site can be used is as an inline reference to text added to articles, rather than just blankly adding the external link. Hopefully this helps. Wildhartlivie (talk) 08:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 07:39, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Blocked

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because it has been identified as an account used for promotion of a company or group, with a username that implies that this has been done by that company or group. See Wikipedia:Business' FAQ and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.

This kind of activity is considered spamming and is forbidden by Wikipedia policies. In addition, the use of a username like yours violates our username policy.

You may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|your reason here}} below or emailing the administrator who blocked you.

Your reason should include your response to this issue and a new username you wish to adopt that does not violate our username policy (specifically, understand that accounts are for individuals, not companies or groups, and that your username should reflect this). Usernames that have already been taken are listed here.

--Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:31, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Image without license

Unspecified source for Image:Modarazzi.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Modarazzi.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, then you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, then their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the {{GFDL-self}} tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Fair use, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:Image copyright tags#Fair use. See Wikipedia:Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Wikipedia:Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 14:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 14:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ModaRazzi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Username is not meant to promote my company or entity. if the username is a problem I wouldnt mind just using my name Chris Lowe, so it isnt a problem. Your end user agreement is a little bit excessive. I manage my own high traffic site and I deal with spammers on an hourly basis. paticience is key.

Decline reason:

The spamming is also a problem, not just the username. —  Sandstein  23:05, 11 July 2008 (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.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

ModaRazzi (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This is something I was discussing with wiki editor Wildhartlivie to figure out the best course of action he/she was speaking with me via email about this and that person was to check a board to figure out what to do. there is a reason that I feel that these links were not spam but links that under the guidelines are helpfull to wiki but not suitable for inclusion due to copywrite issues. I think this is part of the problem with this system that people jump straight to conclusions before looking into edits. I am NOT a spammer I was trying to include links to the most recient collections IE pictures of those collections of which I have only a limited user agreement. I dont see add links to these pictures as spam in in way. additionaly I am taking time away from my publication to help wiki, I have my own traffic I dont need to drive traffic from wiki. Part of the issue at hand is noone bothered to look into what it was before making a judgment call. under external links that are suitable for inclusion to wiki the links I submitted apply to two of the five reasons. the tos conflicts. let me again say I am NOT a spammer I find that word extremely derogitory. spammers are people posting unrelated data for bargan shopping and penis enlargment pills. I posted external links to pictures of the collections of the corrisponding collections to the designers page. I would think that would be fairly blantant considering there are other links for older collections that are there and have been left there. The whole thing smells of preferential treatment to another publication, especially since I link to you consistantly. Very Rude in my opinion. I have consistantly explained myself, and my reason for these inclusions to wiki which ARE considered acceptable under your own tos. If any of you think I need or am trying to use wiki to drive traffic then you are sorely mistaken. If this is the manner in which wiki treats it's new editors then it is very aparent I have wasted my time in attempting to help. I understand you all have had spam problems but guess what so do I everyone does. I dont even treat people who blantantly spam me this poorly.

Decline reason:

Your request is too long and confused. Please read WP:GAB and try again. —  Sandstein  06:45, 12 July 2008 (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.

Is it just me?

Happened across this whilst hunting something else and was intrigued by the vociferousness of the exchange. In the interest of fair play, after reading the various UserTalks and such, I visited modarazzi.com and several other related sites.

Is it just me? Or is this a blog site for international fashion in Second Life?

A well done blog (except for the annoying cursor change) but a blog nonetheless. Rarely are blogs candidates for inclusion in Wikipedia for obvious reasons.

Mr. Lowe, can we talk? Well, it works for Joan but I'm no Joan.

Anyhow. Rather than duking it out with Wikipedians, I would suggest your resources might be better utilized getting your blog comments linked to actual significant events or persons of interest.

For example, the Maseno Project and Garments of Hope which you blogged about in June. This is a project which you blogged about but are not commercially linked to. Ergo, a Wikipedia article about the Maseno Project in Maseno (in the Kisumu District of Nyanza Province in Kenya) might be of general interest and thus a legitimate article for inclusion in Wikipedia.

I'm just a beginner in Wikidom but perhaps Abbie, or someone on her staff, could author an article on the Maseno Project; the history behind it, the people involved, the impact on the general area or culture, etc., etc.. Associated fund-raising events as well as third party commentary (ie, blogs) in re to the project or related events just naturally become factual news links to the article. In other words, someone came to their aid. This is what they did. This is who was there. These folks blogged about it. Rough but you get the idea.

Perhaps there is room in the Second Life Wiki article for a section on how Second Life events (ie, Garments of Hope) can be used to enhance life in the real world, and vice-versa. I warn you however, the Wiki crowd, fashionista lovers included, is fact-driven. Your personal opinion matters little (and oh is that an ego buster that is tough to get over ... take it from me). If you were to pen an article section on Garments of Hope, keep the Wiki text to the facts: where it happened, when it happened, why it happened, and who it happened for (and who has be real, of course). Then, an external link a in support of the facts would likely be acceptable.

Just a few random thoughts from an old dude who (eeek) wears white socks year 'round. :-) Best regards. JimScott (talk) 22:41, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

User:ModaRazzi

A tag has been placed on on your user page, User:ModaRazzi, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages: user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam and the guidelines on user pages.

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page in question and leave a note on this page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Calton | Talk 11:19, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

I have deleted the page, please, we are not an advertising service. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 11:27, 29 July 2008 (UTC)