User talk:209.195.135.218

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Regarding edits to Paper shredder

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Paper shredder 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 for advertising or promotion. 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 before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia.  

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.
The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: 'businessrecords\.com' (link(s): http://www.businessrecords.com/doc.asp?page=21&subpage=87&subsubpage=50) .
Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! SquelchBot (talk) 19:38, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
If this is a shared IP address, and you didn't make the edit, please ignore this notice.

According to Wikipedia's guidelines for external links, articles "should include links to Web pages outside Wikipedia if they are relevant. Such pages could contain further research that is accurate and on-topic; information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks); or other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article for reasons unrelated to their reliability." In this case, what could be more relevant than an article listing what documents should and shouldn't be shredded? Especially given the fact that the external link that remains is no less commercial than the one that was deleted. I'm genuinely trying to be helpful and I thought I was in accordance with the rules.