Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Clark Kokich, by
CultureDrone (
talk ·
contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Clark Kokich seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the
criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Clark Kokich, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --
Android Mouse Bot 2
16:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a
spam link, you will be
blocked from editing Wikipedia. Spammers may have their websites
blacklisted as well, preventing their websites from appearing on
Wikipedia and other sites that use the
MediaWiki spam blacklist. --
SiobhanHansa
20:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Editors adding links to these sites:
-- SiobhanHansa
Hi. Thanks for leaving a message on my talk page. If your reason for editing Wikipedia is to add links to other sites, then you're really just in the wrong place, you might try a directory service like http://www.dmoz.org instead. We ask editors to try and build GFDL encyclopedia articles. That normally means writing neutral point of view material in the articles, backed up by reliables sources. Coming here with a site you want to find a way to use as a reference/citation (that is, in the body of an article backing up an assertion) is not normally a way to write neutral articles and is considered inappropriate, especially when the sites you are using are not good encyclopedic sources. General external links (in the external links sections) can be useful but are subject to our guidelines on external links and (as with all content) are subject to consensus agreement by other editors. Those external links guidelines specifically ask editors not to add links to websites they are connected with to an article directly. If you are connected to a site you really think (after reading our guidelines) would be an asset to the article, you should suggest that link on the article talk page and let other editors decide whether or not it is appropriate to add - even this should not be abused as a way to promote the website.
I hope this answers your question, I've made a few assumptions, so if I've misinterpreted please let me know. If you'd like to know more about contributing to Wikipedia in general check out our welcome page and our core principals. -- SiobhanHansa 15:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
It isn't encouraged to write or edit articles about subjects you are closely connected to but it's not prohibited either. However, people who do this often find the experience frustrating - it's exceedingly difficult to write in a neutral manner and to collaborate with other editors when you have such an intimate stake in an article. Having put that warning at the front, here are the steps:
First read up on notability for articles about Internet based subjects (often referred to as WP:WEB). This is particularly germane to the issue of whether or not an article about your site should exist on Wikipedia - there are lots of articles that don't meet this standard, but many of them are there for the same reason we still have spam links even though we try not to. If you've found trying to add links only to have them removed frustrating you'll find writing an article only to have speedily deleted or trounced in a deletion debate to be an even more disheartening process. The community does not generally find pointing to articles about similar subjects persuasive - on the basis that if we make a mistake once it doesn't mean we should repeat it, and if we make a exception once it doesn't mean we've opened the flood gates. So I recommend you make sure you can make a good case for your site's notability before trying to get an article about it. If you want help on what this means in practice, let me know.
There are two routes to getting the article started:
Hope that's helpful. Let me know if anything is unclear. -- SiobhanHansa 18:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to party. 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. The http://sss.collegetips.com website is not a reliable source and it was made very clear above that your presence here to promote the website is not in keeping with our policies or mission. Please stop. -- SiobhanHansa 17:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. Its apparent this account is only being used to spam wikipedia. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia.-- Hu12 ( talk) 18:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
Hello, this is a message from
an automated bot. A tag has been placed on
Clark Kokich, by
CultureDrone (
talk ·
contribs), another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be
speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because
Clark Kokich seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the
criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please
see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.
To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting
Clark Kokich, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at
WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the
bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. --
Android Mouse Bot 2
16:57, 27 July 2007 (UTC)
This is the only warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a
spam link, you will be
blocked from editing Wikipedia. Spammers may have their websites
blacklisted as well, preventing their websites from appearing on
Wikipedia and other sites that use the
MediaWiki spam blacklist. --
SiobhanHansa
20:01, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
Editors adding links to these sites:
-- SiobhanHansa
Hi. Thanks for leaving a message on my talk page. If your reason for editing Wikipedia is to add links to other sites, then you're really just in the wrong place, you might try a directory service like http://www.dmoz.org instead. We ask editors to try and build GFDL encyclopedia articles. That normally means writing neutral point of view material in the articles, backed up by reliables sources. Coming here with a site you want to find a way to use as a reference/citation (that is, in the body of an article backing up an assertion) is not normally a way to write neutral articles and is considered inappropriate, especially when the sites you are using are not good encyclopedic sources. General external links (in the external links sections) can be useful but are subject to our guidelines on external links and (as with all content) are subject to consensus agreement by other editors. Those external links guidelines specifically ask editors not to add links to websites they are connected with to an article directly. If you are connected to a site you really think (after reading our guidelines) would be an asset to the article, you should suggest that link on the article talk page and let other editors decide whether or not it is appropriate to add - even this should not be abused as a way to promote the website.
I hope this answers your question, I've made a few assumptions, so if I've misinterpreted please let me know. If you'd like to know more about contributing to Wikipedia in general check out our welcome page and our core principals. -- SiobhanHansa 15:33, 9 October 2007 (UTC)
It isn't encouraged to write or edit articles about subjects you are closely connected to but it's not prohibited either. However, people who do this often find the experience frustrating - it's exceedingly difficult to write in a neutral manner and to collaborate with other editors when you have such an intimate stake in an article. Having put that warning at the front, here are the steps:
First read up on notability for articles about Internet based subjects (often referred to as WP:WEB). This is particularly germane to the issue of whether or not an article about your site should exist on Wikipedia - there are lots of articles that don't meet this standard, but many of them are there for the same reason we still have spam links even though we try not to. If you've found trying to add links only to have them removed frustrating you'll find writing an article only to have speedily deleted or trounced in a deletion debate to be an even more disheartening process. The community does not generally find pointing to articles about similar subjects persuasive - on the basis that if we make a mistake once it doesn't mean we should repeat it, and if we make a exception once it doesn't mean we've opened the flood gates. So I recommend you make sure you can make a good case for your site's notability before trying to get an article about it. If you want help on what this means in practice, let me know.
There are two routes to getting the article started:
Hope that's helpful. Let me know if anything is unclear. -- SiobhanHansa 18:27, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to party. 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. The http://sss.collegetips.com website is not a reliable source and it was made very clear above that your presence here to promote the website is not in keeping with our policies or mission. Please stop. -- SiobhanHansa 17:28, 11 February 2008 (UTC)
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. Its apparent this account is only being used to spam wikipedia. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia.-- Hu12 ( talk) 18:16, 13 February 2008 (UTC)