User talk:207.216.236.248

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopaedia. 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. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thanks. OhNoitsJamieTalk 23:01, 8 June 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Neoconservatism on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Kf4bdy talk contribs 01:04, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] EVIDENCE AND AFTERMATH

The external link you provided to 9/11 conspiracy theories will most likely be removed from the article. There is no byline in the external source, so it has low credibility. Personally, I will most likely read the article and view the videos that are there. Even though I may find the information presented credible myself, I would still strongly recommend that it be removed from the list of external links. The primary reason is the lack of a byline. I don't completely agree with wikipedia's stance on reliable sources. I think in this young "information age" some of the perception of what sources are reliable will adapt as the age gets older. That being said, I wholly agree that a source should be verifiable and accountable (some human with a name needs to sign it). It's bedtime for me now, so I won't be removing it. Chances are it will be gone before I get back to it anyway. Umeboshi 05:09, 14 December 2006 (UTC)