User talk:Tmcsheery/ArchiveAnnoyingarguements
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
/rewrite of Physics
See the rewrite that is also going on at physics/wip and talk page. --Michael C. Price talk 17:55, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Please do not add commercial links to Wikipedia
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 encyclopedia. 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. talk to JD wants e-mail 17:11, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I have removed links to your commecrial website from many of the Mocap-related pages and you keep re-adding them. I'd appreciate if you would leave the links off as these pages are objective entries conencring various fields of mocap, not opportunites for you to market your company's products 1canuck2 17:21, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Please don't label the removal of links that don't conform to our external links guidelines vandalism, and please don't reinsert links that don't conform to said guidelines. talk to JD wants e-mail 17:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
I would appreciate you leaving the site alone and stop using sock puppets to make it look like you are two people. You are not only wasting my time, you are confusing me trying to figure out what you did. Tmcsheery 20:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
1canuck2 and I are not the same person. talk to JD wants e-mail 20:54, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Not sure what "sock puppets" are, but J Di and I are different people. In fact, if you check my first edits on the page you'll see J Di undid them as he/she initially thought I was vandalising the page. I am curious to hear your justification for your links on these pages? 1canuck2 21:03, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Well I know most of the worlds leading experts in motion capture having worked on this for 12 years or more , so if you'd like to talk to them about if this is good information let me know. Otherwise you are asking for an infinite amount of proof to hundreds of different people as to what constitutes adequate justifications for telling people where to find information on our devices. Tmcsheery 21:14, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
Wikipedia isn't here to aid people in finding your company's products, it's here to educate people. Unless your website can aid in this without advertising your company's products, a better reason will be needed before your link is considered for insertion. As a suggestion, you may want to discuss the insertion of the link on the talk page of one of the articles. talk to JD wants e-mail 21:18, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
And I respectfully disagree but will be more than happy to move this to the talk pages. I've asked for another editor to arbitrate. I'll get back to you. Tmcsheery 21:22, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. -- - GIen 22:39, 27 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Warning removal
Please do not remove legitimate warnings from your talk page or replace them with inappropriate content. Removing or maliciously altering warnings from your talk page will not remove them from the page history. You're welcome to archive your talk page, but be sure to provide a link to any deleted legitimate comments. If you continue to remove or vandalize legitimate warnings from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. Thanks. talk to JD wants e-mail 00:13, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Response
As an independent observer (you asked me to take a look), I think those links should probably remain out of the motion capture article. If you look at the external links guideline, you'll see those links don't fall under the category of links that should be included. They aren't references that back up info in the page, they certainly aren't appropriate as links to the organization the article is about (because it's not about one), they don't represent points of view, they don't include useful content inappropriate for an encyclopedia, and they don't have neutral, accurate information not already found in the article. The links don't meet any of the "links to be used occasionally" criteria either, but do fit some of the "links to normally be avoided" criteria, especially number 1: "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article here would have once it becomes a Wikipedia:Featured article." Also, these are "Links that are added to promote a site, that primarily exist to sell products or services," whether or not that's your intention in adding them: the point is that those sites are primarily in existence to sell products.
However, I'm familiar with your history here with regards to PhaseSpace. It's clear to me that your motivation here is to include a link to the PhaseSpace company. You may be including links to other companies, but fairness is not the question here: none of those links are appropriate. Mangojuicetalk 04:10, 28 August 2006 (UTC)
