Jump to content

User talk:Deli nk/archive

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is getting too long, so I've started another page at User talk:Deli nk/Archive 1.


Welcome!

Hello Deli nk/archive, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  - UtherSRG (talk) 11:41, 11 November 2005 (UTC)

Welcome and Thanks

Welcome to wikipedia. Thanks for reverting Ariel Sharon to the correct version I was about to check to work out exactly which version to fix my revert up to as at first it seamed that IPs might of only vandalised but on realising it was -100 bytes I went to work out which version to revert to. You might want to join the counter vandalism unit If you need any help with anything (at your rate I dont think you will) just leave me a message on my talk page --Adam1213 Talk + 23:42, 22 January 2006 (UTC)

Spam Link?

How is it a spam link? On Omega-3. It looked like a quality link to me.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.41.37.146 (talk • contribs)

You have repeatedly added links to that blog to multiple articles. It has been repeatedly and quickly removed by many different individuals. It's time you realized that the consensus is that a blog whose sole purpose seems to be to promote the use of fish oil and the sale of fish oil is not an appropriate reference for an encyclopedia article. If you have information to add to the articles, go ahead and add it. But when your only contibution to Wikipedia is doing nothing but adding links to the same website to articles over and over and over, you're a spammer. Deli nk 14:20, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
It's a blog I read regularly and it is highly relevant to fish oil. It is not my site. How am I a spammer? The site doesn't exist for the sole purpose of selling fish oil. In fact, they didn't even have ads on the site until a couple months ago. It seems you are on a witch hunt and are removing highly useful websites. Also, if you bothered to follow the discussions of the entries I edited, rather than just skimming my edit history, you would know that I am REMOVING spam links, not adding them. I challenge you to find me a website more relevant to fish oil than Fish Oil Blog. By removing it you are doing wikipedia users a disservice! The fact that ads exist does not mean it is solely for the purpose of selling fish oil. Do your research! I know it is effortful to bring a high level of discrimination to editing these entries, but Wikipedia users shouldn't suffer due to your laziness. You seem to be on a witch hunt and are speaking and acting entirely out of ignorance! --71.41.37.146 15:35, 25 January 2006 (UTC)
You seem to be missing the whole concept of consensus. Deli nk 18:46, 25 January 2006 (UTC)

Spam Link?

Why are you removing a link that goes to a website that you can search "steel" and get over 5 thousand results of various steels. This would be good for any engineer who is interested in a specific type of steel with specific properties. I'm just trying to give people who are interested in steel more options. 207.42.85.70 18:48, 15 February 2006 (UTC)

See WP:EL Deli nk 21:29, 15 February 2006 (UTC)
If you look at the site, it's a database that is very useful to these products. It does not qualify as one of the links not to add. This site seems to have a lot of admins who just remove links. You may have looked at the link or you may not have. I have seen other materials that have links to sites like this. So if you don't remove those, then its unfair to remove mine. Understand that most people are trying to give links to good information that people can use. 207.42.85.70 14:27, 16 February 2006 (UTC)

Caffeine

I presume that you were trying to tidy up and somehow got the wrong version. I reverted the article to my last version again. The text the new users is trying to add is a copy and paste from a coffee company web site. --GraemeL (talk) 18:25, 10 April 2006 (UTC)

Men's Wearhouse

I am not sure why you deleted that link at Men's Wearhouse—it certainly looks legitimate to me. Please advise. Cheers, Dick Clark 20:13, 13 April 2006 (UTC)

User talk

Just a friendly reminder, don't forget to sign your messages and warnings with four tildes to include your username as well as the date. Mrtea (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Hmmm...as far as I know, I have always signed my messages. Can you let me know where I didn't? Deli nk 11:26, 24 April 2006 (UTC)

Removed new section on Kevin Trudeau

Hiya, I like your new section. But it can only be put back if you can find a verifiable source which mentions that criticism. - RoyBoy 800 15:40, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

OK. I'll find a reference. Deli nk 18:12, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

Affiliate Marketing Article

Hey, thanks for removing the casino spam link from the Affiliate marketing Article. You also removed the other link which I added (next to a lot of content and references etc.), with the comment, that I would like to hear opinions about it before it just gets removed. I was there when we had the long discussions about what site to add. It's tough. The Dmoz link was the only compromise to have at least one further pointing resource for readers of the article. I am building currently a massive collection of, for the most part, free resources for affiliate marketing and more. Not just a collection of links, but stuff like an aggregated new feed that merges various leading industry news sources into one convenient feed, also a public Google calendar with industry events. I am going to add the link again. See ya at Talk:Affiliate marketing. Cheers, --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 05:17, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

OK. I won't object to adding it back in. Deli nk 11:08, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Thanks, and honestly, check the resource page(s) out and let me know what you think. If you see anything that I missed, tell me and I will add it. Thanks again. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 11:51, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

Affiliate Marketing Article Discussion - Invitation to Participate

Your Contribution History shows that you have some interest in the content and the quality of the Article Affiliate marketing. The Concern has been expressed that this article or section is missing information. An open discussion was started at the articles talk page and I would like to invite you to participate in this discussion and express your opinion regarding the issue that was raised. Sincerely. --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 09:49, 13 June 2006 (UTC)

I've put up this link countless times, www.gotalkmoney.com/topsavingsaccounts. Let me get this straight, I don't OWN this site and the other sites stink. Besides bankrate.com, this is the only other site that constantly updates their list. So if you're going to delete my resource, delete the others, they don't serve a purpose!

Good suggestion. When I see them, I'll remove them too. Deli nk 14:55, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

did i give u sleepless nights

hi Deli, sorry if my "innocent editing" troubled u. I don't mind your removing the links i added, as a matter of fact I appreciate your efforts to keep this place clean. I have used wiki for many many projects and other works and it would not have been same without ppl like you. Please don't mind my "spamming" :-) , i just felt that the lucky bamboo page was not complete and so just wanted to help in some way, and I got little carried away that why someone found the link unrelated after it was there for 3-4 weeks. I just thought some non-member removed it(the plant photo is also missing). anyway, how relevant the link is should not matter since its my link and I didn't know that members can't add their own links. won't happen again, though I might ask my readers to add the site here if they find it relevant :-) Jacksmith123 16:12, 1 July 2006 (UTC)

I am relatively new here. I have been using Wiki for some time as I am a college student and there is a plethora of information available. Before I posted the external link to the energy drink blog, I made sure that I was not the only one. There are several other links to energy drink sites in the external link section. Also before I posted I read the discussion on that page to see if the issue has come up before. This is what I found:

"There should be some method to sorting the external links section. I believe the reviews are relevant information that make sense for inclusion since many people looking up these drinks on wiki are looking for information on specific drinks or a recommendation. While wikipedia is not there to recommend it should provide relevant information on where they should look."

So I am not the only one that feels these external drink reviews are relavant. Beeing new I don't want to offend any senior editors. I would love to contribute more information to the energy drink article, but I figured I would start small since I am learning the ropes. I would love to here your further thoughts.

Thank You

In general, links to personal reviews are not recommended for Wikipedia articles. And adding lots of links to a single website is generally considered spamming. The best thing to do with potentially controversial external links is to mention on the article's talk page that you would like to add it, then if no one objects, go ahead. Hope this helps. Deli nk 19:09, 26 July 2006 (UTC)


The link to R- fitness.

I not a writer, I am a trainer and I have decided to share my knowledge with people who cannot afford to have a trainer or just want get a few tips on how to get fit. I based in London. Anyone who logs onto my website can view a free monthly workout video www.r-fitness.co.uk. If you navigate through my website you will see that I am not selling anything. I am just a trainer trying to share what I know best “fitness”. My income is from personal training and it is very restricted to the London area. I am already a very busy trainer and there are only so many hours I can work in a day therefore I am not trying to get clients from Wikipedia. In my career, I see alot of unhealthy and unfit people who I hope to help and I am merely offering free advice and free training to help a society that is becoming obese and unhealthy. I am sincere in trying to share my knowledge. For these reasons, I have created the page General Fitness Training on Wikipedia. I do not understand why you keep deleting my external link when I am offering a free service without looking for any financial gain in return.Thanks Ricardo Macedo

Carrot juice posting

Hi - sorry not to be a bit more helpful but I find this sort rather unclear (the Cape Verde ones referred to earlier were sort of similar - could be useful but multiple postings from IP addresses - it irritates me). The reason for this tho is to say thanks for the weblinks search bit. Hadn't found it for myself so it's appreciated. Take care -- Nigel (Talk) 17:22, 7 August 2006 (UTC)

Affiliate Marketing - External Links Section Preview

Hey Deli,

Please have a look at the preview of External Links at the Affiliate Marketing Talk Page and let me know what you think about the selected sites and their description. Please also state if you agree to their addition to the Article or not. Thanks --roy<sac> Talk! .oOo. 13:25, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism?

I am a little confused by two messages I received (one from yourself, and one from a bot) claiming I had vandalised Lawrence Sheriff School's page. (Your exact message "Please stop. If you continue to vandalize pages, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia.") Besides never having heard of the school, I have no will to vandalise any pages whatsoever. Apparently signing up is an easy way to solve the apparent IP confusion that seems to have occurred, so I have just done that. Can you explain why I received the message? Thanks - Duklai

Without knowing which IP you refer to, I have no way of knowing what edits may have resulted in the warnings you saw. But if you are using a computer that is shared by multiple individuals or an ISP that assigns the same IP to many different people (such as AOL), you should think of those warnings as being directed at "individuals using this IP" rather than at "you" specifically. The best way to avoid this confusion, as you've already discovered, is to sign up for an account so that you don't get caught up in any consequences from vandalism done by anonymous users. Deli nk 20:12, 5 September 2006 (UTC)

"Revert to the revision prior to revision 74521260 dated 2006-09-08 13:28:42 by Jonpaulwade using popups)"

I have noticed that you have removed some edits that I made to Rossnowlaghand Physical Fitness. You also seemed to have removed some else for the same reason. I have not added anything to Wikipedia that would cause a pop-up (I don't even know how to make a pop up if I wanted).

Update - Hi, after reviewing Wikipedia:External links I now understand why the links were removed i.e. that they are impartial as owned by me. Maybe I shall upload one photo to add to the page instead. I admit I failed to read all the rules the first time I logged in. I thought that my link would provide extra useful information.

Thanks, Jon.

Be careful with deletions

You labelled Contra body movement for deletion without checking article's history. In fact, it was trivially vandalized. `'mikka (t) 01:06, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Ooops. Thanks for catching that! Deli nk 18:52, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Varenicline

I've permanently blocked Dr Allen. He is a linkspammer, pure and simple, who could not keep his paws off Wikipedia despite numerous reverts and warnings. JFW | T@lk 17:15, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Careful

Please be more careful - [1]. Thanks. JBKramer 20:43, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Yikes! Thanks for catching that. Hopefully I've fixed it correctly. Deli nk 20:49, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

Linkspam?

Hi, Deli nk. I saw your comment in User talk:Wccaccamise and thought you might be interested in checking out the contributions of User:William charles caccamise sr, md; they appear to be the same person. Cheers! -AED 20:57, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

WP:EL fix to Coffee

Careful there...in addition to removing the link for valid WP:EL reasons, your edit also reverted away a another edit that was unrelated and was a worthwhile change. DMacks 13:53, 18 October 2006 (UTC)


Thank You

 For offering your opinion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Lori Klausutis (third nomination). The article was deleted. "The quality of mercy is not strain'd . . . It is enthroned in the hearts of kings, It is an attribute to God himself; And earthly power doth then show likest God's, When mercy seasons justice." ~ Wm. Shakespeare, The Merchant of Venice, Act IV Scene 1. Morton devonshire 22:42, 20 October 2006 (UTC)

Deprodded H. T. Chen

I've only found 1 good citation but I'm inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt. What do you think? --Mereda 17:18, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

That's one more than I was able to find. I have no objections to the de-prodding. Thanks. Deli nk 19:04, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi Deli nk, and thanks for your participation at the recent RfA, which did not succeed. For those of you who expressed their support, your kind words and your trust are sincerely appreciated. For those who were opposed --especially those who offered their constructive criticism-- please accept this message as assurance that equally sincere efforts, aimed at enhancing the quality and accuracy of representations within the Wikipedia, will continue. Striving for improved collaboration and consensus will also continue, with all of your insights in mind, while applying NPOV ideals as fairly and reasonably as possible. Ombudsman 05:24, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Careful with tagging for speedy deletion

Please be careful when tagging articles for speedy deletion as you did for 1-2. The revision you tagged was a recent change to the article and the reverts now made fix the vandalism. Martin Hinks 16:03, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for catching that. Deli nk 16:04, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

Church notability

I've started a page on notability guidelines for local churches. You can join the discussion here: Wikipedia:Notability (local churches and other religious congregations) Lurker oi! 11:54, 25 November 2006 (UTC)


Gazebo

Hi there. Please stop removing the anecdote "Eric and the Dread Gazebo" without discussion. I appreciate that the gazebo page is often subject to vandalism, but the gazebo anecdote is significant in its particular subculture and has no other obvious home. I would be more than happy to see an abbreviated version, if you would care to provide the same. I have not restored the anecdote as yet, to allow you time to state your case for its removal, but I will do so within the week if there is no response from you. 172.142.236.237 01:15, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

I replied at Talk:Gazebo. Deli nk 13:41, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Chemicals that you prodded

I removed the prod for those chemicals, not because I know that they should be kept, but because I think it's something that should be discussed at AfD instead. Or possibly with WP:Chem. FrozenPurpleCube 07:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

OK, that's fine with me. Deli nk 18:21, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Removed aromatherapy reference

On Absolutes, you removed the external reference Essential Oils - Methods of Extraction, claiming it wasn't used for the article. However, I used that page to help understand the different types of extraction processes and explain the particular one used for Absolutes. In other words, it was used for the article.

Is there some other way I should be referencing it besides putting it in external references?

Thanks. Brainsik 02:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

In my opinion that website did not seem to be a reliable source - and it is ad-heavy too. This is typically the kind of link to avoid. But I guess if you found it a valuable resource, and there isn't a more authoratative reference available, I won't object if you want to re-add it. Deli nk 15:56, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
Okay, I found a non-commercial reference and added it. Brainsik 14:36, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Great, thanks. Deli nk 15:57, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

67.159.34.220

I am trying to remove .com commercial sites myself to avoid advertising.—Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.159.34.220 (talk • contribs)

Your last edit removed alot more than just the external links. I don't know if that was intentional or not. I removed the last warning I added to your talk page - somehow I mistook that last edit as re-adding the same link you kept adding to other articles. Also, some .com sites are appropriate, so don't just remove them all. Please read WP:EL. Deli nk 20:54, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

lamotrigine

I'm re-adding www.crazymeds.org/lamictal.html Lamotrigine page at a consumer-run psychiatric drug information site] to the lamotrigine article. Significant portions of my rewrites and additions are based on info from this site, even down to such things as international brand names. I'll re-add it as a ref to cut down on people trying to pull it in future. -- Akb4 19:10, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it. If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  22:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

My monobook.js does not contain any mention of a category - the word "category" does not appear in it at all. I don't know how or why it would end up in that category. Can you (or anyone else who sees this) help me figure out what to do about it? Deli nk 02:45, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

your message to jinky32

Hi, thanks for your note re external links. I think it's little unfair that you've removed all of my contributions linking to a creative commons open content site. Another moderator has thanked me the contribution to the Caravaggio article and now that contribution has been taken off. The site that I am linking to is not commercial and receives no financial benefit from increased visitor numbers - each link I added provides a valid and very relevant contribution to the material on wikipedia - at least as much as the other external links on the articles. I'm not trying to be argumentative - just put my point across :) --Jinky32 16:04, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the polite reply. It's nothing personal, but to me your activity has come across as an attempt to advertise that website - nearly all your contributions have been creating articles about Openlearn and adding links to the website, which is pretty much the definition of linkspamming. If you haven't seen it already, WP:EL has guidelines about adding external links to Wikipedia articles, including the rule, "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain or represent, even if the guidelines otherwise imply that it should be linked." I don't know for certain if this applies to you, but it appears so. If you have gotten support for the addition of the link to an article, I won't object to you readding it though. Deli nk 16:48, 12 February 2007 (UTC)


reply

thanks for this. i understand your decision. if you get a chance to take a look at the site though maybe you'll change your mind - the openlearn site is a creative commons project aimed at widening partipation to education worldwide. we gain nothing financially from increased visitor numbers, and the links that i added to the external links section are directly relevent to the article. Anyway, best wishes nonetheless! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Jinky32 (talk • contribs) 21:01, 12 February 2007 (UTC).

You went to delete the link to Tinkerbell website that I restored. What is your knowledge of parrots and of Congo African Grey in particular that you deem yourself fit to judge what should be in there? Do tell me on what criteria did you define Tinkerbell webpage as 'spam' to be deleted?

Shanlung 23:25, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I never called it spam. I do think it is an inappropriate external link though. Please see WP:EL. And obviously I'm not the only one that sees it that way since someone else removed your website as well. Deli nk 14:05, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Reverting Talk:United States

Why did you revert that users edits. They had two somewhat legitimate complaints about the article itself. The third nonesnsical bit should have been cleaned up with an {{unsigned}} or perhaps removed, but the other two parts of that edit were acceptable according to WP:TALK, which also says you should not remove comments by other users. Maybe I've missed something, but that seemed like an inappropriate revert. i kan reed 18:10, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

All the edits of those two users look like childishness. The two usernames are probably the same person too. I'm surprised that you see it differently. If you disagree you can add their edits back in. Deli nk 18:17, 27 February 2007 (UTC)


Sorry. Don't know how to talk to other users on Wikipedia.

Look, I am adding links to a site I'm a member of and it is important to me that the links stay there. I beileve the site is very useful and informative. Hell, check it out yourself.

Please click on these links, WP:EL and WP:SPAM, and read guidlines for the addition of external links to Wikipedia articles, particularly the section on what not to add. Deli nk 19:22, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Salvia divinorum forums

In general, links to discussion forums are considered inappropriate for Wikipedia articles. That line in WP:EL makes an exception for forums that are themselves the subject of the article. For example, the article about the web forum YTMND could have a link to the YTMND. So I think the links I removed should probably go, but I won't revert. Deli nk 19:31, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

---

OK thanks. I misread what it was saying as "shares the same subject", but scanning it again I can see your interpretation is strictly correct. So in that case I'd maybe argue more generally for exception, e.g. along WP:IAR lines or some such. The forums are part of the overall Salvia phenomena, worthy of inclusion on that basis perhaps.

--SallyScot 21:43, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Ok. I'll leave it up to you and others that have put so much effort into maintaining that article. Deli nk 15:02, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

The vandalism warning you gave me

There was no vandalism. The information I added to the Byron Coley article was accurate. I have restored it along with a cite - the only cite in the article, in fact. Please be more careful in the future about making such accusations. TortureIsWrong 17:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

My aplogies. That's got to be the first non-vandalous Chuck Norris edit in Wikipedia history. Deli nk 18:04, 3 April 2007 (UTC)

Coenzyme Q10

You may want to have a look at Talk:Coenzyme_Q10#Biased_editor.3F. Regards, Wammes Waggle 22:12, 19 April 2007 (UTC)

My RfA ...

Hi. Thanks for supporting my request for adminship. It was successful and I am now an admin. If I can ever be of help, please let me know. Cheers, Black Falcon (Talk) 06:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Cyclone

Hi. I'd like to ask you why did you revert my edit at the article Cyclone, at the extraterrestrial section. The Great Red Spot is anticyclonic and not cyclonic. It should be placed on another page.213.42.21.156 18:56, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't see the explanation you left on the article's talk page. It is common vandalism for text to be removed without explanation, and I mistook your deletions for that because there was no edit summary. Sorry. Deli nk 14:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

That's okay. I think I'm gonna start typing edit summaries from now on.213.42.21.155 18:13, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools

Your monobook is in Category:Wikipedia tools. This is most likely because when you were copying scripts into yout monobook you accidentaly copied their category. Since your monobook is not a tool itself, please remove this category from it (like this). If you intend for your monobook to be a tool, please consider creating a subpage with a more descriptive name, and moving the category there. Thank you, -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  23:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. It should be fixed now. Deli nk 11:50, 17 September 2007 (UTC)
I am afraid it is not - maybe you had it added in more than one place?-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk  20:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
Wow, you're right. It was in there four times. Deli nk 13:44, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

Infertility

Hi - Based on your request, I would like to discuss your removal of the external link *Infertility Doctors & Clinics Find Infertility Doctors & Clinics in the U.S. Based on my research of what external links should be linked, this seems like a perfect fit for the page because it is a "value-add" for the reader and it is something that can't be included in the content of the page directly (i.e. we can't list every individual infertility specialist on the site directly). Here is the wiki article that I'm referencing for justification on why it should be linked: [External_links] —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.242.71 (talk) 15:17, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. But actually, I was suggesting you bring it up on the article's talk page, rather than mine, so I have moved your comment there. I hope you don't mind. Deli nk 14:12, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

Infertility

Hi - I just wanted to follow up on the discussion on the Infertility page (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Infertility) regarding adding back in an external link: Infertility Doctors & Clinics Find Infertility Doctors & Clinics in the U.S. After over a month of discussion it looks like we have a 3 to 2 "vote" to put it back on the page. Here is how I saw the votes: NO - you, Christian B YES - me, Jbelle00, Mikael Häggström

Please let me know if I can put this back on by putting a final note on that discussion page or go ahead and put it back on yourself.

Thanks for taking this through the proper review before just putting it back on. I think you have created a very good resource page by doing that. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.177.242.71 (talk) 05:31, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Feel free to go ahead and add it back in. Deli nk 17:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

advertising

actually it is not 'self' promotion, more like cross-country familial promotion. have not yet talked with him, but thanks for your diligence. good to know there are people who care :) sorry...he is a good boy

Muhammad Ali

...<abuse removed>... My edit to Muhammad Ali WAS NOT VANDALISM. So, please, don't just rollback using that automatic summary. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.156.211.190 (talk) 21:14, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

There's no need for you to be abusive. You should have looked at my edit before making strange accusations. I did not refer to any edit you made as vandalism. Deli nk (talk) 15:39, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Userspace vandalism reversions

I'd just like to thank you for reverting the vandalism B07 perpetrated on my precious userspace. Seems I'm doing something right... Cheers! Tuvok[T@lk/Improve me] 01:05, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. Deli nk (talk) 14:06, 13 December 2007 (UTC)

Subway

Two points: a) have you been inside a morgue before? I have & it does smell just like a Subway restaurant. b) the page is an advertisement for how great Subway is, not an encyclopedia entry; so I'd argue it is adding nonsense to what is already nonsense. The whole point is that real criticism cannot be made here as it will simply be deleted by the corporation's minnions ... there is a difference between gratuitous vandalism & subversive criticism. Besides once the point was made it was removed so I can't see the problem. Regards AS. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 210.49.93.20 (talk) 04:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

:) What a silly excuse for vandalism! Deli nk (talk) 14:53, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

A word to the wise

Regarding this edit: See WP:RBI. Daniel Case (talk) 17:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

I guess I was stuck on the R part of RBI. :) Thanks for taking care of it. Deli nk (talk) 17:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I would also point out that WP:USER states editors may remove warnings at will from their own talk pages. Regardless, thanks for your help in fighting vandalism! --Kralizec! (talk) 17:12, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Actually, I did not revert any removal of warnings. I did revert the removal of the {{whois}} template, which I think was an appropriate action to take. Deli nk (talk) 17:16, 20 December 2007 (UTC)


BetaCommand

Please tell me how that is not vandalism? I warn Metros about a personal attack on myself (which I am allowed to do) and BetaCommand removes them, not once but twice...and accuses me of "trolling" (am sooo sick of that term)....please explain to me how that isn't vandalism. - NeutralHomer T:C 19:26, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

WP:AIV is for those who are deliberately damaging Wikipedia. You have a disagreement with him, please talk to him about it. Deli nk (talk) 19:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I could talk to my deaf cat (and I have one) and get a better response. I have tried before talking to BetaCommand and it gets me nowhere. All I get is a migraine. After awhile, I just start reporting people. It's people like BetaCommand that is pushing me (and others) away from Wikipedia. - NeutralHomer T:C 19:33, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
I'm sorry about your disagreement with Betacommand. I know these kinds of things can be frustrating. And I know that good editors often get pushed away from Wikipedia by those that are difficult to deal with - I've seen it happen before. I guess about all I can suggest is to either look to some of Wikipedia's dispute resolution processes, or perhaps to take a break from Wikipedia for awhile. Deli nk (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
It's cool....I have noticed it. I am here less and less and when I am something here just pisses me off (pardon my "French") and I just do some minor edits, reverts, cleanup, etc. It's been a nice ride, but I think that ride is about to come to an end. It's cool though. Take Care and Have a Merry Christmas...NeutralHomer T:C 20:03, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Merry Christmas to you, too. Deli nk (talk) 22:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Great success!
Thank you for supporting my RfA, which passed with a final tally of 53-3-2. Special thanks goes to Shalom for both the suggestion and the nomination. I'm honored by the trust that the community has shown in me, and will do my very best as an administrator. Thanks again! faithless (speak) 08:54, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

Your Rollback Request

Congratulations on becoming a Rollback! To learn more about the feature click here. Have fun crushing vandals!!!--Kushan I.A.K.J 13:21, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I think it will be helpful. Deli nk (talk) 14:06, 14 January 2008 (UTC)

Re: Brandon Locher

Haha. The afd template was added after I last looked at the article but before I hit the delete button, sometime during that 60 second span. Thus the confusion. --Jayron32.talk.contribs 19:35, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Silly threat

you best not tell me what to do woman. i will find you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 150.104.210.231 (talk) 12:39, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Grow up. When schoolchildren don't behave, they get told to stop. If they continue, they are disciplined. Deli nk (talk) 13:17, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for the note. Can you please place full-protection on the Macy's page? I represent the Macy's, Inc. Corporate Communications department and wish to prevent further vandalism on the page. I understand that when the page is protected, I cannot make further edits and must request assistance from an administrator.

Thanks for your help. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.23.85.90 (talk) 19:27, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

Also, thanks for adding a warning to the IP address for the vandalized text. I have replaced the vandalized text with approved text. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.23.85.90 (talk) 19:38, 17 April 2008 (UTC)


I can't protect the page because I am not one of Wikipedia's administrators. However, I don't think that any administrator would protect the article at this point. Wikipedia is the "Encyclopedia that anyone can edit", which is both the source of its success and it's greatest problem, vandalism. Relative to many other articles, Macy's has not been the target of much vandalism, despite the recent edits. Details about when protection of an article is allowed can be found at Wikipedia:Protection policy. If there are specific problems with the article that you (as a representative of Macy's) are concerned about, now or in the future, it would probably be best to contact Wikimedia through the OTRS system. You can find details about this at Wikipedia:OTRS. Finally, I'm sorry that I deleted that bit that you had added the first time - it was unintentional. Deli nk (talk) 19:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)

UAA

Hey, sorry about that. I only meant to remove the one name, I didn't notice that there were actually two reports at the time. I'll try to be more careful, take care. --Bongwarrior (talk) 13:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I see ... no problem. Deli nk (talk) 13:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Vandal

I see You wrote to 168.216.129.10 about vandalizing Kiowa. Now Hopewell is also being vandalized by some-one from this same IP. Is it about time to register a VR? Kdammers (talk) 10:27, 21 April 2008 (UTC)

You can report anyone repeatedly vandalizing at WP:AIV. Deli nk (talk) 12:57, 21 April 2008 (UTC)


Phadia by Oddben

Hi Deli nk. I see that my edits are being monitored, and now I understand why. I am not employed by Phadia. My reasons for mentioning them are merely personal due to a recent exposure to them...and I noticed on investigation that they and their services are not really represented in Wikipedia (and believe me - they should be). So, I have taken it upon myself to provide an educational link-through of the afflictions that they can diagnose along with link-ups from the various afflictions to a diagnostic resource that hopefully clinicians can find and use to solve patients allergy issues more promptly.

Before starting out, I typed (for example) Pepsi (etc) and concluded that the mention and link of the Phadia website to be a lot more beneficial to public wellbeing than a soft drink manufacturer that dominates the global market!

I have to admit, I did think that you were in some way connected to the company Phadia. In general, adding external links to articles that are not directly related is forbidden, and that's why I removed them (except from the Phadia article, where a link to their website is appropriate). Your other edits also came across to me as if you were advertising for the company, but they do seem to contain useful information too. That's why I asked others who might know more than me to take a look also. If you don't mind, I'm going to copy your response here to over there (Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine‎), so that your point of view will be represented. Deli nk (talk) 19:41, 7 May 2008 (UTC)


99.141.236.181 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Couldn't justify it before, but now blocked for harassing you. Toddst1 (talk) 17:59, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Looks like sock of this IP (see User:99.141.233.29) are coming out of the woodwork here. Wildthing61476 (talk) 18:11, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Todd, thanks for protecting the page I was just about to go to WP:RPP for this request. Wildthing61476 (talk) 18:12, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I'm filing an WP:ANI report now. Toddst1 (talk) 18:13, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you Todd, Wildthing. Deli nk (talk) 18:33, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

India

hi, thanks for reverting that page, I was just experimenting and would have ficed it myself. No harm meant and none done, I hope. vk_aditya (talk) 18:57, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem - no harm done. Deli nk (talk)

Userpage vandalism

I see you've received some userpage vandalism recently. If you list your userpage (and talk page if you want) here, then a countervandalism bot will monitor changes made to your user page and revert any it thinks are vandalism automatically. Hut 8.5 19:38, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. I've added my pages to the list. Deli nk (talk) 19:47, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar! Hut 8.5 19:52, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter June 2008

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter June 2008

--Chef Tanner (talk) 17:07, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

joining the ranks of the admins

Thanks for your participation in my successful RfA. Now I’m off to do some fixin'... Pinkville (talk) 01:33, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

Rfa thanks

Thank you for participating in my RfA. The Rfa was successful with 64 Support and 1 Neutral. None of this would have happened without your support. I would also like to thank my nominator Wizardman and my sensei/co-nom bibliomaniac15--Lenticel (talk) 09:12, 20 June 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter July 2008

WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter July 2008

--Chef Tanner (talk) 16:03, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

Raw Milk page

i examined the raw milk page and found that you deleted all my information i contributed last night. Rawmilk (talk) 14:55, 16 July 2008 (UTC) I would like a full explanation —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rawmilk (talk • contribs) 15:09, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia has rules about presenting a neutral point of view. Details can be found at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. The additions you made are not consistent with that policy because they present opinion and speculation as fact. Apart from that, your additions phrases such as "let's just say", use "you" to address the reader, and have "weasel words" such as "everybody says". This creates a tone that is completely inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Also, there are numerous spelling and grammar errors as well. Because of this I have restored the older, better version of the article. Deli nk (talk) 16:21, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Thank you for voting in my RfA, which succeeded with 71 support, 14 oppose, and 5 neutral. Thanks for your participation. I hope I serve you well!

--SmashvilleBONK! 23:52, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hello! I just wanted to pass along my thanks for your support in my RfA from earlier this week. I hope I did not disappoint you. I am going on Wikibreak and I will let you know when or if I am back on the site -- I am trying to take time away to clear my thoughts and refocus on this and other priorities. Be well. Ecoleetage (talk) 04:55, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Screen protector

Please do not add advertising to articles such as you did to screen protector. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 20:10, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


We are not advertising a screen protector. We are telling the actual history of the screen protector. We do not sell any screen protectors. Please verify our information before you remove it again.

Bill Warman Inventor of the screen protector —Preceding unsigned comment added by ScreenProtector (talk • contribs) 20:45, 23 September 2008 (UTC)


RFA Thanks

Deli nk, I'd like to thank you for voting in my RFA. Thanks also for expressing your trust in me, and I hope that I live up to your expectations. Don't forget, if you have any questions (or bits of advice), please leave a message on my talk page. Thanks again, SpencerT♦C 02:29, 8 October 2008 (UTC)

SierraSil

Hi did you add the advertisement notice on the Sierrasil article? If so, could you clarify your position? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seanjpf (talk • contribs) 00:11, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

It just seems like advertisement for the product. All the statements come from the book Mineral Miracle that seems to exist solely to promote the product. Deli nk (talk) 14:40, 13 October 2008 (UTC)

RfA thanks

Hi Deli nk, and thanks for supporting my successful request for adminship. It was nice to see all the kind comments I got from my supporters and I hope that I will be more useful to the community now that I have the tools again.--Berig (talk) 15:49, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Wasn't me

I think you've got the right IP, but the wrong person.

-- Currently 59.92.7.136 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.92.7.136 (talk) 19:38, 14 November 2008 (UTC)

The message was left for the person who did the vandalism. Some IP addresses change periodically, so you may want to create an account or log in to avoid future confusion with other IP users. Deli nk (talk) 13:09, 17 November 2008 (UTC)

thank you

My RFA passed today at 150/48/6. I wanted to thank you for weighing in on the RFA--I will do everything I can to uphold the policies of this site, and try to make it a better place. All the comments, questions, and in particular the opposes I plan to work on and learn from, so that I can hopefully always do the right thing with the huge trust given to me. rootology (C)(T) 08:26, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Spam

I am unsure why you consistently mark on-topic, researched and well written information fas spam simply because it's available on a commercial site.

I hope it isn't due to a conflict of interest or some other hidden agenda. This type of activity is what turns people away from contributing to this entity. Read the content before you strike anything off next time please. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Skoobe1 (talk • contribs) 02:34, 13 May 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback

 Unfortunately, my RFA was closed today with a final tally of 75½/38/10. Though it didn't succeed, I wanted to thank you for your participation in it. I intend to review the support, oppose, and neutral !votes and see what I can do to address those concerns. Special thanks go to Schmidt, MICHAEL Q., TomStar81, and henrik for their co-nominations and support. — BQZip01 — talk 20:15, 15 May 2009 (UTC)

Additional information needed on Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SANTO GOLD

Hello. Thank you for filing Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SANTO GOLD. This is an automated notice to inform you that the case is currently missing a code letter, which indicates to checkusers why a check is valid. Please revisit the page and add this. Sincerely, SPCUClerkbot (talk) 17:46, 11 June 2009 (UTC)

Veritee

please advise what is your problem with the Veritee article we develloped with Jimblanc and we all agreed that this is interesting and a good article with notability and references and therefore it qulifies with wikipedias rules. --Netquantum (talk) 10:28, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

I simply think it is spam. There have been prior attempts to advertise Veritee on Wikipedia and those were all removed. I think this one should be too. Deli nk (talk) 14:39, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
do you simply believe that all drinks on wikipedia should be removed ? where are you based now --Netquantum (talk) 18:25, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
Your questions are irrelevant. Here are the answers to the questions you should be asking: I think the article Veritee is advertising nonsense and that you are here only for marketing that product. I think you don't care for Wikipedia's policies and that you persistently and willfully violate them for your own purposes. I think your presense here is a net detriment to Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 18:32, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


products and product articles have always been on wikipedia, you can find more than 10'000!!!!!and do not work in the interest in wikipedia. This article is not publicity but reference to a product that has more than 100 references on the internet...--Netquantum (talk) 18:46, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I fully support having articles about products. I like them. Such articles should be neutral, not promotional. The article that you have written was obviously promotional. When someone tried to fix it to make it neutral according to Wikipedia's policies, you simply reverted it to the bad version. Wikipedia is better off having no article about Veritee than having a crappy promotional version. Deli nk (talk) 19:10, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


In this case i sutggest that you do not remove the article but simply edit and make a nice article. in my opinion the previous edit was not better but poor. --Netquantum (talk) 19:48, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
I don't think the subject of that article meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for the reasons I give at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Veritee 2. And your version of the article is clearly inferior to the other one. Deli nk (talk) 20:00, 17 June 2009 (UTC)


Gina Martin

I really appreciate you efforts for the wiki. With reference to the following:

19:16, 17 June 2009 Deli nk (talk | contribs) (48,446 bytes) (→External links: we don't need 11 links to the same website here - just one will do fine) (undo)

Please, advice me, why you are not accepting links from the same?

I think, if material is really relevant and authentic, then, accepting links of the same site will definitely helpful for the readers because they can get more information for that specific topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gina Martin (talk • contribs) 05:54, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

According to the internal links policy (WP:EL), "avoid separate links to multiple pages in the same website." A link to the main page on ExxonMobil at fortune500global.com is fine, in my opinion, but having 12 is pointless because the others are accessible from the first one anyway. Deli nk (talk) 10:24, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Negative calorie food

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Negative calorie food. Fences&Windows 23:37, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Hi there,

I am interested in collaborating on the article Physical Fitness. I would like to suggest more information be included regarding the term 'Health Related Physical Fitness'.

I note that the page already contains mention of the related components, but in fact, the US Dept of Human Health, the American College of Sports Medicine and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention attribute these 5 components (Body Composition, Muscular Strength, Muscular Endurance, Cardio-respiratory fitness and Flexibility) to the term Health Related Physical Fitness.

Looking forward to your reply.

Greetings

Cleto Tirabassi 20:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Cletonevio (talk • contribs)

I am not that interested in editing that article, but if that is your interest, please feel free to improve it. Deli nk (talk) 20:58, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

popups

Hi Deli nk! I see that when you revert using popups, you're leaving an edit summary of "Revert to revision $1 dated $2 by $3 using popups" - I guess that you need to provide some input for the parameters $1, $2 and $3 to make the summary meaningful. Thanks for the good work! -- Timberframe (talk) 16:21, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

That happens to me on occasion, but not consistently. Those fields should be filled in automatically (popups doesn't give an option to fill them in manually), but I don't know why it isn't done every time. Deli nk (talk) 16:28, 12 January 2010 (UTC)

Adventure Travel

Hi, I noticed you'd removed some spam from Adventure travel in the past, so thought I'd check an edit with you to see if it flies. I've just dropped out the 'Tour operators, travel agencies & retailers' section entirely. It appeared to me to be nothing but spam, and was presented as a key focus of the article. Also, theres a note on the talk page about an agency offering to maintain this section (As further evidence of spam) Do you think this deletion is reasonable? Cheers Clovis Sangrail (talk) 08:37, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I think your removal of that section seems perfectly reasonable to me. Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 19:52, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Vodafone

Hello

Could you please explain why you have removed the information that I updated on the Vodafone page please:

cur) (prev) 19:56, 19 January 2010 Deli nk (talk | contribs) m (50,763 bytes) (Reverted edits by VC Ainge (talk) to last version by Gr1stsock) (undo) (cur) (prev) 16:45, 19 January 2010 VC Ainge (talk | contribs) m (51,075 bytes) (undo)

This information is perfectly legitimate, it is factual, links to the Vodafone website and declares the source information. It contributes to the history of Vodafone products and services. thanks, V C Ainge

It didn't seem relevant, and came across a bit like advertising, and the included external link didn't work. Deli nk (talk) 12:34, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

Synthetic Wine Corks

Hello, I noticed that you undid my edits on the Alternative wine closures, Cork taint and Cork material articles:

12:30, 25 January 2010 Deli nk (talk | contribs) (9,897 bytes) (Undid revision 339848998 by PseudoCinderella (talk)) (undo) 12:30, 25 January 2010 Deli nk (talk | contribs) (11,017 bytes) (Undid revision 339848492 by PseudoCinderella (talk)) (undo) 12:30, 25 January 2010 Deli nk (talk | contribs) (12,814 bytes) (rm advertisement) (undo)

I am a student working on a project involving new media. I have been researching the wine closures industry for the past few months, and based on what I've read from several sources, it seems to me that Nomacorc is a major player in the industry and underrepresented on Wikipedia. I believe the information I contributed followed the "rules" -- it was factual and contained links to several legitimate sources, such as industry magazines. I've noticed that Stelvin caps are able to be referenced on several Wikipedia pages, so I don't understand why Nomacorc can't do the same. I'm semi-new to the editing process, so can you please let me know how I can revise my edits to make them suitable for the pages? Thanks. PseudoCinderella

To me, the edits came across as promotional. It's fairly common for people to come here solely for the purpose of advertising companies and products. If you do have any conflict of interest here (no business/financial relationship with Nomacorc), then I don't have any objection to you redoing your edits. Deli nk (talk) 14:39, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments. I will repost the edits with close attention to including only what my research found via independent sources. PseudoCinderella —Preceding undated comment added 01:34, 28 January 2010 (UTC).

Warmergate listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Warmergate. Since you had some involvement with the RedirectName redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). 147.70.242.54 (talk) 03:03, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Dermatology

Any interest in dermatology? If so, we are always looking for more help at the Dermatology task force, particularly with the ongoing Bolognia push. I can e-mail you the login information if you like? There is still a lot of potential for many new articles and redirects. Just let me know. ---kilbad (talk) 02:11, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Although I'm interested in general in health and nutrition topics, I don't have any specific interest in dermatology. Thanks for letting me know though. Deli nk (talk) 13:57, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Physical Therpy edits

Your revision of the spelling of Orthopaedic to Orthopedic is inconsistant with the WP policy you cited. The spelling with the "a" has been on the page for many years. It is the spelling used by the leading institutions in the field in the US and in the Commonwealth Countries. See American Academy Orthopaeic Surgeons, Orthopaedic Section of the APTA, British OA, Canadian OA, Indian OA, Chinese OA...

Also if you edit in one place you should edit in all placs according to the WP policy you cite. Which doesn't really apply to this situation. Please revert your edits. Thanks.DoctorDW (talk) 15:40, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

The article uses American spelling throughout (organize, not organise; program, not programme; utilize, not utilise; etc.). Therefore according to Wikipedia policy (WP:ENGVAR), the spelling of words shouldn't be changed to the British spelling. Also, the consensus at Wikipedia, is that spelling used here is not dependent on the spelling used by other organizations. Deli nk (talk) 18:14, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

International Christian Churches

Why have you nominated International Christian Churches for deletion? This religious group currently has 31 congregations globally, so it definitely warrants an article. Please provide a rationale in regard to your proposed deletion of the article. BlueGold73 (talk) 19:42, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

My nomination for deletion includes my reasoning. You are free to read it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/International Christian Churches. Deli nk (talk) 23:29, 22 August 2010 (UTC)

Recent Edits

Hi Deli nk. I have attempted to contribute to the Wikipedia Site by adding external links to a website that I have found to be particularly useful to me in planning trips to Ireland. You have undone all of my additions. But I am just a contributor to the site, trying to add value to the information already provided. Each of the links were directly to the page where information and photos of the site is located. The photos alone are worth the visit to the website.

I have no connection to this website; I simply want to share this additional information. I checked my "My Talk" page and no reason has been given for reversing my edits. I am hoping you will reply to my talk page or post here to help me understand the reason my edits were removed, and what I can do to right this.

Thanks, May09dream Barboursville, VA May09dream (talk) 00:22, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by May09dream (talk • contribs) 01:57, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

I guess it came across as promotional to me. If you think the links are valuable to Wikipedia, I don't object to them being added. Deli nk (talk) 18:01, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! May09dream (talk) 02:36, 21 December 2010 (UTC)

Taj spam

I've just cleaned up another bout of spamming Taj Pharmaceuticals, this time from 183.87.72.190 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and added warnings on the user talk page. Maybe you would like to add this IP to your ANI sub-page on the subject. Astronaut (talk) 18:51, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I'll add it to my list. Deli nk (talk) 19:45, 13 September 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to awesome work by Shirik, Taj Agro and Taj Pharma are now on the title blacklist. TNXMan 18:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
That's good to hear. Hopefully it will help keep things under control. Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 15:28, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Bid4Assets

Hi -- I'm wondering why the link to Bid4Assets was removed? I am working with them on some digital communications issues, and they're preparing a Wikipedia entry on their company -- I'm not sure why a company using online auctions as a business model would be removed from a list of companies that use online auctions as a business model -- can you please explain? Is it because it was just text and not linked to bid4assets.com? Ckpcreative (talk) 16:40, 3 December 2010 (UTC)CKPcreative

Wikipedia does not aim to be an indiscriminate collection of information. There is no reason that an encyclopedia article about the online auction business model should list every company that uses an online auction business model. I removed all the items from the list that are non-notable, based on a criteria that those that have Wikipedia articles are the notable ones. Deli nk (talk) 23:45, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
Are you being paid by Bid4assets to promote/advertise/market this website? Deli nk (talk) 23:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

No, but I do have friends who work at the company who are asking me questions, and they're working on a Wikipedia article -- which, I assume, would in turn then make their appearance in a listing of companies appropriately notable? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.246.30.238 (talk) 19:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

You list Bid4assets as a client on your website, that's why I asked. If bid4assets is working on a Wikipedia article about themselves, you might suggest that they have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. If bid4assets meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion, I think it would be fine to list them at the online auction business model article. Deli nk (talk) 23:15, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

To clarify: I did some social media outreach for them on one specific auction, but they're not a current client. Thanks for your additional clarification. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ckpcreative (talk • contribs) 13:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Four (energy drink)

I made a reorgization of the Four (energy drink) page that made the sections more chronilogical. You removed this and called it vandalism. I've been working on the article for the past month and a half, and I seem to be the main user that is updating the article with current events. I was struggling with how I could reorginize the page, and decided that putting the FDA ruling after Reactions made much more sense. Please let me know how my edits could be considored "vandalism." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jackp666 (talk • contribs) 20:13, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

I'm sorry. I made a mistake and have left a note of apology on your talk page. Deli nk (talk) 20:24, 16 January 2011 (UTC)

Spam removal

Well, some of my contrib been remove by you which consider as spam, I give up contribute info...now joining the contribute in Anti-SPAM 219.95.123.254 (talk) 01:53, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Any efforts to remove spam from Wikipedia are appreciated. Deli nk (talk) 19:47, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Coffee

Why did you remove this link from page coffee?

www.dullsheep.com/2011/01/ways-of-preparing-coffee/

Thank you —Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.150.23.100 (talk) 02:30, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Blogs are generally not suitable external links for Wikipedia articles. Deli nk (talk) 20:06, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Dear can you help me and guide me how to upload images on wikipedia with copyright code or something. -- Ranatalwar (talk) 20:09, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello Deli nk. As someone who's been involved in the Taj Group articles, you may also be interested in the AFD discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ranvir Kumar Singh. Thanks, Borkificator (talk) 21:08, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

common i am not some spammer.

please do not block me or something.

i m very interested in talking up young ceos articles.

if there is something like taj spammers i will not take up any related article.

If you whish to delete current article please feel free to do it.

regards

--Ranatalwar (talk) 21:32, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Hello

Dear, I have no connection with the spamming of anykind.

I live i United Kingdom and a PHD student and Hold a Job.

I am interested in Pharma Business.

And Also It is Durham University Dynamic IP Address.

So i have no idea how to defend my case as i dont know.

But as the person and biography was part of our assignment for study and research SO decided to write the article.

As a first article i was ver exited and was bit annoying to see it getting deleted.

Anyways all the users have helped me in getting information.

As i was confused between two persons.

So thank you AND I can consider improving articles like pharma raw materials and chemicals like i did with Phenylacetone.

So if my account stays i can think of doing that.

--Ranatalwar (talk) 15:28, 29 January 2011 (UTC)


Someone has been using Durham University IP addresses for nearly a year to promote Taj Pharmaceuticals in a manner that violates Wikipedia's rules. This has been so persistent that it has resulted in the university's ability to edit Wikipedia being revoked for 3 months. Now within days of this block expiring, you show up doing exactly the same thing using the Ranatalwar account and also Durham University IP addresses. Frankly, it just isn't believable when you play innocent and suggest that you have no connection to the prior abuse. Deli nk (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

The Anti-Spam Barnstar
Thank you for your diligence in tracking a persistent spammer and sockpuppeteer across 18 articles, and from dozens of sockpuppet accounts and IPs. Borkificator (talk) 09:34, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 19:33, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

ShantanuSingh198

Just a heads up that there has been more activity on this case. You can see the details at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ShantanuSingh198. TNXMan 16:20, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I have updated User:Deli nk/Taj spam campaign. Would you be willing to close this TFD and speedy the two articles Taj Pharmaceuticals Limited and Taj Agro International (G4 candidates based on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taj Pharmaceuticals)? Deli nk (talk) 18:10, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Done. Cheers! TNXMan 18:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks again. Deli nk (talk) 18:23, 22 February 2011 (UTC)


Hello

I am not spamming the page with adding external link, i thought it is legitimate link to add in that page to contribute for the benefit of the users. Please let me know why you felt i am spamming 'Gold' page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Haja maideen (talk • contribs) 17:37, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

It seems to me that your only purpose here is to promote jewelinfo4u.com. Every edit you have made since Jan 2009 has involved adding links to this website to various articles. This website is clearly promotional in nature and not the type that is acceptable for Wikipedia articles. Deli nk (talk) 21:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Marketing Research

I noticed that you had reverted a change I made due to "vandalism." Can you tell me what the change was? Thank you! Karenmharvey (talk) 00:42, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Gosh no, please don't misunderstand me. The edit summary was "Reverted 1 edit by 137.191.233.130 identified as vandalism to last revision by Karenmharvey". The edit after yours was referred to as vandalism, and I restored your version. Deli nk (talk) 12:30, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

CSD rationale

I removed the G12 from Ryo Okumoto. Looks to me like it is not so clear-cut, and I suggest listing it at Copyright problems

Note that the article was created in 2005. At some point, copyvio material was added, but it was removed in 2008. So at sometimes, earlier and perhaps later, there may be versions free of copyvio. Thus, the entire article should not be deleted. Listing it as Copyright problems will allow the experts to determine the most recent copyio free version, if there is one, and salvage the article. If you aren't willing to list it, please let me know and I'll do it.SPhilbrickT 14:31, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I should have looked closer at the article's history. I think you're right that there may be non-copyvio versions in the history. I have listed it at Copyright problems and someone more experienced can take a look. Thank you for letting me know what to do. Deli nk (talk) 14:41, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
No problem. 24 hours ago, I would have been unsure how to handle this, but I ran into a comparable situation, and got good advice from Moorifddengirl.SPhilbrickT 14:47, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

I am new to wiki and don't understand why the ext link was removed for Thyme honey. It seems like good supporting information concerning culinary, regional and historical use of Thyme... at least that was the intent of the article. If there is anything wrong with the linked article please let me know and I will consider updating it. On the other hand, if you felt the link was inappropriate for any other reason please enlighten me or direct me to the related information. Thanks! Sforler (talk) 19:04, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Hopefully you will be able to help me understand the reasoning behind the removal of the external link on Honeydew / Forest honey on the honey page as well. Sforler (talk) 23:42, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

The link you added to thyme is more about honey, than it is about thyme. I don't think it is all that relevant to the article. The links are to what appears to be essentially a personal blog site, which I don't think meets criteria defined at Wikipedia's external link policy. If honeytraveler.com is a site that you own, I'd suggest that you have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. Deli nk (talk) 11:21, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. I read the COI information and can see where the blog portion of the HoneyTraveler site would not comply, however this comprises a definite portion of the site and was not referenced with the external link. My goal is to produce a reference site for honey and the factors that effect it. I value your feedback and have two points to make: 1/ I reread the Thyme honey section and it seems neutral to me. The fact that Thyme is a major nectar producing plant is an important factor in the understanding of the use of the plant. Remember Thyme honey is made from the nectar of the Thyme plant, it is not a product that is made from Thyme, like Thyme-flavored toothpaste or Italian seasoning. The melissopalynological characteristics of Thyme honey are unique to Thyme. I read wiki entries for other plants that are nectar producers and see references there. The nectar producing property of a plant and the description of the resulting monofloral honey it is an important fact that deepens the understanding of the culinary use of the plant, at least as much as the relation of rosemary to Aphrodite deepens the understanding of the mythology of Rosemary. Honey production is mentioned with other herbs and plants; see Robinia pseudoacacia, Lavender, Tupelo, Small-leaved Linden (Tilia cordata), Canola and many more. I respectfully ask you to reconsider your decision. I believe the characteristics of the honey produced by the plant are an important culinary aspect of the plant. 2/ You didn't really answer the question about the removal of the honeydew link for the honey entry. Honeydew is honey. This link was clearly an expansion of the honeydew information pertaining to honey, an area that is not well understood nor explained comprehensively in the honey section. This was completely neutral and informative. At least in my opinion. Will you please clarify your thoughts here too and reconsider your decision. Sforler (talk) 05:38, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Advertising

How am I advertising or promoting the company? I don't understand. And why do you care so much about that page? I updating the information. Sms is no longer around and I'm updating the company description, bc it's old and incorrect. Please advise.Christine Servh (talk) 17:48, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles must be written from a neutral point of view. The content you have been adding is written from the perspective of the company ("we have created", "we believe", etc.) and highly promotional in tone ("dynamic web start-up", "all seamlessly integrated", etc). What you have written simply isn't acceptable for an encyclopedia article. Deli nk (talk) 15:06, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Aspartame

Why are my additions to WIKI pages being deleted? RMMP Consulting (talk) 20:29, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Aspartame, not surprisingly, tends to be a controversial article. Significant changes to the article, such as the additions you were attempting to make should be discussed on the article's talk page (Talk:Aspartame) first. Only if there is consensus there among the article's editors to do so should the content then be added to the article. Deli nk (talk) 22:01, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Self-esteem

Why has the section on External links been removed? Jacobisq (talk) 11:13, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

At the time it only contained one link that didn't seem appropriate to me, so when removed the link, I also removed the section heading. Deli nk (talk) 12:59, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

IBM Lotus Notes

Hi Deli nk,

I noticed your recent edit to IBM Lotus Notes.

There are all sorts of problems with this article, and I can agree that there are better ways to handle related software than with a list of external links. However, a linked list is of more use to the average reader than an unlinked list. Also, I doubt that this was created as an advertisement, as the products are from a variety of vendors and are a good representation of third-party tools.

I'd like to revert your reversion of this edit, but I wanted to check with you first. Rupert Clayton (talk) 20:07, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

External links should not be placed in the main body of text. They should only be placed in an external links section. If the individual products are notable themselves and have Wikipedia articles, they can be wikilinked. And even if they don't have Wikipedia articles yet, red links can be appropriate in certain situations too. But a long list of external links in the text is inapproriate. It explicitly violates the Manual of Style ("Do not use external links in the body of an article") and the external links policy. Deli nk (talk) 20:20, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
Good points. So let's avoid external links within the main sections of the article. At this time, I can't see that anyone is likely to put a lot of work in writing individual articles on these tools, and such articles might be contestable under the notability criterion anyhow. But, identifying principal add-on products and providing links is both encyclopedic and useful to the reader, so I have edited the article to list these tools briefly in the text and included links in an External links section at the end. The selection of products could likely be improved, but I think we now have something that more closely meets WP criteria. Does that work for you? Rupert Clayton (talk) 23:38, 2 September 2011 (UTC)
That's fine with me. Deli nk (talk) 00:47, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
So I made those changes and the Related Software sub-section of External Links stuck around for a couple of weeks. Then people added more products to it, and now you've deleted the whole sub-section. What gives? Did you just decide that it was irretrievably biased? I have my doubts, too, but it seems like the kind of thing that might have merited a talk page justification. Your edit summary cited WP:EL, but we discussed that above and resolved that the external links should be placed separately.
The current situation is that the article gives useful examples of related software products in the text, but has no links to further information. This seems a little more user-unfriendly than we need to be. Rupert Clayton (talk) 03:44, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
It seems that section was already accumulating unnecessary links. But you're right, it's something that should be discussed on the talk page first, so I have undone my edit. Deli nk (talk) 08:46, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Feather_hair_extensions

Hello,

This is user featheredhair. I created the page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feather_hair_extensions. All info derived from that article is gathered from my site. I would appreciate it if you stopped removing my reference links. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.197.179.29 (talk) 20:03, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

It's just advertisement. Deli nk (talk) 21:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

hi its lagunacounter Can you tell me why you block all my external links? Take a look at the websites, its all informations, i worked on this data several years now to put all the information together for this diffrent plants. Oh yes im owner from all this websites, and yes they are on the same webhosting.

But in the end i was thinking wikipedia wants to share information as much as possible. On this websites no selling takes place, it are purly informative websites. i only wanted to share this with wikipedia too.

i only wanted to know your thoughts about this, no worry i will not add any links of my websites anymore to wikipedia.

greetz laguna — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lagunacounter (talk • contribs) 07:50, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

If you would like to improve Wikipedia, it would be much better to so by adding information to our articles. When all your edits involve simply adding links to your own websites, this comes across as self-promotion or spamming. Deli nk (talk) 13:06, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Hypercolor

Dear Deli nk,

Kindly stop reverting this entry. I am not sure why you keep doing that. I am not related to 0509. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhines317 (talk • contribs) 13:03, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

No, your repeated attempts to advertise on Wikipedia are not welcome. If you persist, you will be blocked from editing. Deli nk (talk) 13:13, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

It's not advertising! It's a DOCUMENTED history of the continuation of the status of color changing clothing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mhines317 (talk • contribs) 14:33, 16 October 2011 (UTC)

International Churches of Christ

Hi Deli nk. I see that, not long ago, you posted a warning on the talk page of User talk:Webmaster1967 for inappropriate editing at International Churches of Christ. Could you take a look at that page again and see if the current editing patterns are similar to the earlier problematic ones. I also wonder if the new editor User:JamieBrown2011 might be a puppet, but I don't have any experience with addressing such things. Thanks, --BlueMoonlet (t/c) 00:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

I stumbled upon that article years ago and it seems to be a controversial church. Critics/former members call it a cult, and current members have at times been quite aggressive in trying to remove criticism and/or portray the church in a fantastic light. Maintaining the article in a neutral point of view is difficult. As for Webmaster1967, he was making some good edits and some clearly bad edits to the article. During some of his edits, he would alter external links to sites that criticized the church so that those links wouldn't work anymore. I have no doubt that damaging these links was intentional and deceptive. This damage was hidden in edits that were otherwise unremarkable, and were repeated several times and were the source of my warnings. From a quick look, JamieBrown2011 does not appear to be the same editor. Based on his user page, I assume he is an employee of the church, though, and therefore has a conflict of interest. His edits show this non-neutral point of view, but this user appears to be editing in good faith, in my opinion. Deli nk (talk) 00:46, 22 October 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Barnstar of Diplomacy
For writing such an excellent and diplomatic comment on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Secret 2 I award you a barnstar. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 13:48, 4 November 2011 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:198.36.39.3

You posted a warning about this user's vandalism. Every edit by this user appears to be vandalism but AFAICS no action has ever been taken to prevent it. I don't know the procedures to bring about a ban, so I'm appealing to you. -- 98.108.202.17 (talk) 07:58, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

If the vandalism is recent and persistent, you can report the IP address to administrators at WP:AIV. Deli nk (talk) 15:40, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

Hi. My edits and references were reversed for the Wiki page 'strength training'. Can you tell me why my contribution was not accepted and if I need to do something differently in the future. Thank you.Kam012069 (talk) 21:31, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

I reverted the edits because external links should not normally be used in the body of an article and it appeared to me that because you are repeatedly adding external links to doctoryessis.com that you are essentially just promoting that website. Deli nk (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

new artilce but major spamming concerns

Dear,

I am a pharmaceuticals research student! I have recently involved in a Drug research and came across a company named "Taj Pharmaceuticals", an Indian drug company. The concern is that I was unable to find any relevant data on Wikipedia. I have been involved in data correction on Wikipedia on changing IP address basis and I am not claiming to be a major contributor.

But due to research and the detailed knowledge I am very surprised that why that company has spamming records on Wikipedia and above all is there any possibility of article now, given the long spamming history. I can write an article but I am unaware of technical detail of a Wikipedia article apart from referencing.

So kindly advice what can be the possibility.

regards Ananya bathAnanya bath (talk) 13:16, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

reference to: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ananya_bath/Taj_pharmaceuticals, http://en.wikipedia.com/User:Deli_nk/Taj_spam_campaign

Because Taj Pharmaceuticals was deleted as the result of a discussion by the Wikipedia community at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Taj Pharmaceuticals, it is unlikely that recreating the article will be acceptable. Deli nk (talk) 20:48, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!

Thank you! See: Taj spam campaign

Shirt58 (talk) 16:57, 14 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks! You can't go wrong giving a girl kittens. Deli nk (talk) 01:01, 15 June 2012 (UTC)

You vandalized Ziprasidone

Please, refrain from acts of blanking vandalism (see WP:Vandalism#Blanking.2C_illegitimate) like that committed today (see before and after). Sincerely, --24.186.223.176 (talk) 20:20, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

I don't think you know what the word "vandalism" means. Deli nk (talk) 02:25, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi,

I got a message from you about external links and a spam warning.

I am not sure to which links you're referring to. I take great care to add links only to webpages which contribute and add to the specific entry on wikipedia.

I do not link to spam websites solely for promotional reasons.

Johnd28 (talk) 14:58, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

I was referring to worldofdiets.com which has been repeatedly added to multiple articles by multiple users - classic spamming. Looking at your other edits, I see that your contributions have consisted of little more than adding links to websites that are highly promotional in nature. If your intentions were not promotional, then I apologize and recommend that you have a look at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources and Wikipedia:External links. Deli nk (talk) 19:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Deli nk,

We, Spot Magazine (serving the pet community for over 7 years), felt a few of our contributors well researched articles were good reference material for a few wiki pages. So we researched the wiki rules at length, carefully evaluated what references seemed appropriate, and braved making changes. Adding links seemed a good way to get our feet wet, so to speak. We're sorry that we apparently violated the rules since you removed all our links but would appreciate it if you'd point out where we erred. Thank you for your help in navigating this new process as well as for your consideration. KayakDave (talk) 01:39, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Since all your edits involved nothing more than adding links to a single website, it certainly appeared that you are only here to promote that website. The relevant policy, Wikipedia:External links, states "you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent," which seems to apply here. If you would like to add a link to a website that you are associated with, probably the best thing to do is to make a request at the relevant article's talk page (Talk:Litter box, for example) and let other editors decide whether the link should be added or not. You might also want to have a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, if you haven't seen it already. I hope this helps. Deli nk (talk) 12:31, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

Why did you cancel the links ? The link I added is a thecnical Blog, not commercial, speaking about Hazardous Areas. In the same list there are some links that linked commercial pages. If you cancel my link you have to cancel all other links — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rudivittori (talk • contribs) 20:45, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

I removed links to hazardousareas.net because Wikipedia guidelines do not permit linking to blogs. See Wikipedia:External links for details. Deli nk (talk) 13:36, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

Ok, I understand. But the blog, if you visit them, is not commercial, but technic, and there are a lot of links directed do commercial web sites than would be better cancel. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rudivittori (talk • contribs) 19:31, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

It doesn't matter whether it is commercial or not, it is still not an appropriate link. If you find other links that you think violate Wikipedia's external link policy, you are free to remove them. Deli nk (talk) 19:48, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

WikiWomen's Collaborative

WikiWomen Unite!
Hi Deli nk! Women around the world who edit and contribute to Wikipedia are coming together to celebrate each other's work, support one another, and engage new women to also join in on the empowering experience of shaping the sum of all the world's knowledge - through the WikiWomen's Collaborative.

As a WikiWoman, we'd love to have you involved! You can do this by:

Feel free to drop by our meta page (under construction) to see how else you can participate!

Can't wait to have you involved! SarahStierch (talk) 01:31, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

Lingzhi

Hi. Not sure what happened with my reversion. I thought I was removing an EL. de Bivort 21:05, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Probably just some kind of edit conflict in the servers or something. Deli nk (talk) 21:19, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Blue Jean (magazine)

Having looked at your concerns about this article, I think the best thing is to delete the article entirely. To this end I have put a PROD on it. Op47 (talk) 17:26, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. Deli nk (talk) 12:34, 24 November 2012 (UTC)

Recent reversion

I don't know that this reversion was called for. The editor had cited a source. The fact that you are I do not partake of a belief in traditional herbal medicine is not a reason to remove this information: many do accept such things, and it is not for us to gainsay it. However, the information should be put in the proper context, something like: "among herbalists, x is considered to have medicinal properties." This statement is true, given its proper context. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 17:18, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

  • You are incorrect in assuming that I do not partake in any belief in traditional medicine.
  • You are incorrect in implying that I claimed that the editor did not cite a source.
  • I do not believe that the cited source is an appropriate reliable source for what herbalists believe. I believe that it is an appropriate source for only what one person thinks.
  • I think some of the statements were in violation of WP:MEDRS and reversion was appropriate and not uncalled for.
  • I think the editor is a single-purpose-account here for the sole purpose of promoting the cited book.
  • Lastly, I have removed the content again for an entirely different reason: it is a blatant copyright violation with the text copied word for word directly from the cited source. Deli nk (talk) 19:33, 28 November 2012 (UTC)

Citalopram/Escitalopram

The statement "Critics call this the industry's "Dirty Little Secret."" originally had two sources to back it up. I removed one, but the remaining source is a published book by Irving Kirsch. It has a whole chapter by that title. Surely it is a valid source, he has his own wikipedia page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by AmiLynch (talk • contribs) 21:17, 7 December 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it is appropriate content for that article, and the fact that it has been repeatedly removed by others indicates that this is the consensus opinion. Deli nk (talk) 14:44, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Indiatimes

Well, Deli, whoever you are, it seems you just want to stick to Wikipedia rules, when "breaking" this rule isn't degrading the reputation of Wikipedia. "Reliable" resources like the Times of India" site will never report such cases. Don't you understand? shopping.indiatimes.com is their own creation. Go through those referenced sites first and see how many consumers have been cheated. The feedbacks are quite reliable (some consumers may exaggerate, but that is because they have been cheated). I just don't understand what happens if Wikipedia can be used to alert consumers. Why are you bent upon deleting that piece of information? I am NOT concluding anything. Isn't it sensible? -59.95.35.248 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 10:41, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

The purpose of Wikipedia is to be an encyclopedia, not a resource for warning people about your personal concerns. Wikipedia policy doesn't permit the kind of content you are trying to add. If you disagree with policy, you may attempt to have that policy changed, but you may not ignore the policy just because you disagree with it. Deli nk (talk) 14:21, 11 December 2012 (UTC)
"Wikipedia policy doesn't permit the kind of content you are trying to add." Do you want to follow all rules and help in cheating people, or go out of your way and try to help page visitors? You may be right, but anybody with power can make these ruthless, useless policies, and do you think other editors have to oblige? Or you tell me some site where I can warn Indian consumers about this big, fraud racket in India. It may have happened to me but has also happened to thousands if not lakhs of Indian consumers.-59.95.15.38 (talk) 16:53, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
The rules exist to prevent people like you from abusing Wikipedia to settle some kind of personal vendetta. Deli nk (talk) 17:23, 20 December 2012 (UTC)
There is no point in talking to you, as you are unable to understand my purpose. You live in a finite world and your mind and thoughts are bound to the objects of a finite world. You must learn to go out of the box. Anyway I do not now wish to confront you and stick to my views. Wisdom is more important than knowledge. I've no interest in using Wikipedia for my purpose as long as people like you are there to interfere. -59.95.20.182 (talk) 08:57, 23 December 2012 (UTC)

Virtual tradeshow

Could you take a crack at the "references" included in the external links of Virtual tradeshow?Naraht (talk) 19:40, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Wow. I don't know how I missed the big red warning at the bottom. I have now properly formatted everything. Does it good to you now? Deli nk (talk) 21:05, 13 December 2012 (UTC)
Thx!Naraht (talk) 21:45, 13 December 2012 (UTC)

Conjugated Linoleic Acid

Hi, well I did my job and found a citation for your concern. It's your turn to uphold your end of the bargain by removing 90% of the references in the article as they are unnecessary and grotesquely harmful to the style of the article. This is an encyclopedia, not some tenth grader's essay. A little dignity, A little class, it's all that I ask. 173.206.96.72 (talk) 21:15, 15 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the needed reference. I don't know what kind of bargain you think we might have that would require me to remove most of the references that support the rest of the article content though. Citing sources is a necessary part of an encyclopedia article. If you find them "grotesquely harmful", you probably have a misconception about the purpose of Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 21:31, 15 December 2012 (UTC)
The purpose of Wikipedia is to provide a free and open encyclopedia. I assure you, even the most respected encyclopedias do not freely list sources to prove their information is valid. Sources are provided where a work, or image is displayed, or where a direct quotation is used. Now granted, Wikipedia has it's own way of doing things where sources are openly displayed to help other editors catch-up as it were. But there is no earthly reason why a simple article such as this should have over 80 references and citations. It damages the style of the article because it's difficult to read, and it betrays a lack of editorial confidence. How can a reader put faith in Wikipedia as a resource, when it's own editors are so insecure they feel obligated to provide sources in triplicate for every single sentence. I was going to try to fix this, but since you've taken it upon yourself to undo such a minute change, I have to assume you've retained a sense of personal ownership of the article. Thus the job of correcting the article falls unto you. (i.o.w. Don't step on others toes, unless you want to do their job yourself) 173.206.96.72 (talk) 06:54, 17 December 2012 (UTC)
If you think that increasing the number of references to support article content causes people to lose faith in that content, you hold quite a minority view. Deli nk (talk) 14:02, 17 December 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to WikiProject Brands

Hello, Deli nk.

You are invited to join WikiProject Brands, a WikiProject and resource dedicated to improving Wikipedia's coverage of brands and brand-related topics.

To join the project, just add your name to the member list. Northamerica1000(talk) 17:10, 21 December 2012 (UTC)

Conventional and unconventional sceince based medicine

Your edit summary was simply a series of question marksconventional conventional and unconventional science based medicine science based medicine"???. Here is the answer to that question, and there is more on the talk page. Promoters of alternative medicine insist that the word "conventional" appear repeatedly in the article. The intent is to insert a deliberate ambiguity to obscure the simple fact that medicine is based on science and alternative medicine is not based on science and As per talk page discussion. The sources even talk about this strategy, to create an impression that the distinction is between conventional and not conventional, not science or not.

As in the talk page, unconventional science based medicine, such as proven but outdated methods, new methods, and very expensive or inaccessible methods, are NOT alternative medicine. I.e., unconventional science based medicine is NOT alternative medicine. So the bloated expression "Conventional and unconventional sceince based medicine" was put in, otherwise the article would be factually false. It would be better not to use the ambiguog word "conventional", which is used in conext at, e.g., NIH, to mean both conventional science based medicine, and unconventional science based medicine.

A handful of editors are blocking removal of the ambiguous word "conventional", and simply replacing it with "science based". Until that is done, the bloated correction needs to go in. I will leave it to you to undo your edit if this makes sense. A better edit for you to make would be to replace "Conventional and unconventional sceince based medicine" with "science based medicine". But that will likely create an edit war you should be prepared to engage in, or the article will go back to being factually false, as it is right now. 64.134.223.74 (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

The reason that I reverted your edit was that it introduced the exact phrase "conventional conventional and unconventional science based medicine science based medicine" with all its duplication. I assumed that you didn't intend that mangled wording, but I wasn't sure exactly what you did intend, so the best thing to do was to simply reverse the mistaken edit. Deli nk (talk) 14:40, 8 January 2013 (UTC)

alt med

I am noticing you because you are one of the "new" editor's reverts in the list below. (I didn't look much beyond that.) The editor of these warring edits claims he is "new" in one breath, but using sophisticated citations of niceties of MEDRS in the other. He is arguing to remove NSF as not a good source, as well as removing NYAS, Academic Medicine, etc, and claims a syllogism "wrong" reasoning as part of his basis for the edits below, while in another breath makes sophisticated inferential reasoning -

Atkins Diet Edit

I made no edit to that article, I think it's something to do with shared I.P addresses. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.56.246.198 (talk) 04:07, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

If you sign up for an account, you can avoid any problems associated with other people sharing your IP address. Deli nk (talk) 19:20, 6 March 2013 (UTC)

Article Feedback deployment

Hey Deli nk; I'm dropping you this note because you've used the article feedback tool in the last month or so. On Thursday and Friday the tool will be down for a major deployment; it should be up by Saturday, failing anything going wrong, and by Monday if something does :). Thanks, Okeyes (WMF) (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2013 (UTC)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges. A full list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on will be at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

INeverCry 19:42, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 19:45, 27 March 2013 (UTC)

Olanzapine

Why did you undo my edit? 78.156.109.166 (talk) 09:33, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

"Feeling like in Hell" is obviously not a suitable description of a pharmaceutical side effect. Deli nk (talk) 15:27, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
But/so the others are good enough? I did find a reference on the web of "Feeling like in "Hell"" for SSRIs though, and I experience it while taking Olanzapine too. So maybe it should be added to SSRI side effects instead? 78.156.109.166 (talk) 08:32, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
You cannot use your own experiences to support Wikipedia content - it must be supported by reliable references, and medical articles have an even higher standard which is outlined at WP:MEDRS. Deli nk (talk) 11:10, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOOD Needs You!

Hi there Deli nk! I've noticed you have yourself listed as a member of the Food and Drink Wikiproject. Unfortunately it looks like the project has been slowly sliding into inactivity except for a couple of people. That makes me a sad potato, and nobody likes a sad potato amirite?

If you'd like to turn my frown upside down, can you do two small things?

First off, go here and add {{Tick}} (checkY) next to your name if you're still part of the project.

Second, go to the project talkpage and participate in a discussion about how to make the project more active, and how to go about making articles in our area of interest a lot better.

You don't want to make me cry, do you? Potatoes have a lot of eyes you know. So come on, join in! :)

— The Potato Hose 18:35, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Spam Removal

You remove a link I posted for the medical uses of botox. I was not intending it as being a spam link. If this was the perceived intention I apologize. I work with several doctors that hold medical patents and top honors. I will be posting more links to what I see as relevant information. Any help or insight to possible spam issues is welcome. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Koosh3434 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 30 May 2013 (UTC) [2]

The link was to a page that appears promotional. Instead of adding links directly to Wikipedia articles, it would be better to first discuss the possibility first on the articles' talk pages. I would recommend reading Wikipedia's relevant policies at these links: WP:EL and WP:COI. Deli nk (talk) 19:07, 30 May 2013 (UTC)

I made a simple addition to the benchmarking page; Chris Bogan, the author of the "Benchmarking for Best Practices: Winning through Innovative Adaptation" has his official website <spam link removed> and has published details of his book and sample chapters. I had merely linked the mention of the book to his page i.e. <spam link removed> [3]

This was only to provide readers with the right reference. Some of the other links for book references mentioned in the same article are old and not helpful for the reader. It was not a spam link. Kindly let me know if this is not allowed or if there is a way to have updated external links for the references. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Infor deepi (talk • contribs) 08:05, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

It seems like a highly promotional website to me. Deli nk (talk) 18:02, 10 June 2013 (UTC)

Hi, I've been doing some editing today of pages related to medical laboratory testing (my area of professional expertise). In the process I've added in some relevant citations and external links, to support and expand upon information in the article. I am surprised that you have removed them without discussion. The 2 places I've linked to are:

1) Analyte monographs from the Association for Clinical Biochemistry and Laboratory Medicine. These peer-reviewed articles are written/hosted by an internationally known and non-commercial professional organisation. They are aimed specifically at people who are interested in technical details relating to how substances are measured - relating to blood tests. They go into a level of detail that would be well beyond a general Wikipedia article, but contain information that many Wikipedia readers will be particularly interested in reading about in more detail.

2) Lab Tests Online. I have put these links in where a Wikipedia article covers a substance commonly measured in a medical blood test. Lab Tests Online is a peer-reviewed, non-commercial, professionally written site run by national organisations representing laboratory professionals across multiple countries. It provides information specifically aimed at patients and professionals who need to understand why a blood test is done and what the results might mean. Again, this is beyond the scope of a general Wikipedia article which is aimed at a general reader. There are international versions of the Lab Tests Online websites giving information specific to each country's healthcare system, so I have linked to the English Language versions.

I don't work for either of these websites. External links are commonly featured in many medical Wikipedia articles, often linking to general information that is less detailed or less independent than the sites I have linked to. I think that by giving more appropriate/detailed links aimed at specific people it makes the Wikipedia articles more useful as a 'first stop' for the interested reader on the internet. I would also like to stress that I plan to do a lot more work on improving these articles over time, not just adding in external links and citations.

Do my edits breach any guidance at Wikipedia:External Links? If not, I will reinstate the edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arripay (talk • contribs) 00:22, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Apologies for forgetting to sign my comment! Arripay (talk) 00:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)
To me, the labtestsonline links came across as excessive - multiple links to nearly identical pages on the same topic hosted by the same organization and added to multiple articles. This did appear to be intended as promotional, but I'm happy to take your word that you are not affiliated with the site. Personally, I would discourage links to websites that contain information that are only useful to readers in one country, but if you feel the links are useful, I won't object to you adding them back. Deli nk (talk) 15:14, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
OK thanks. I do think the links would be useful for specific readers and for future editors, as it's specialised information that can be quite hard to find reliable sources for. I take the point about the multiple links - having looked at the pages for the different countries' sites they are actually very similar. I'll try not to add so many links all at once in future. Arripay (talk) 21:32, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
Thank you for quickly undoing the vandalism to the Didyma article with your edit of 6 May 2013! AlexanderVanLoon (talk) 18:27, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

'Husband'?

An unfortunate typo, I presume? ;-) [4]. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:16, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

Oops. I fixed it now. I'm not sure what was going through my head. Deli nk (talk) 15:18, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

WP:Food

It would be appreciated if you joined in the conversation occurring at WT:Food regarding the layout and presentation of the project's main page. Northamerica1000(talk) 03:29, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Pharmaceutical marketing

Hello... I am a pharmaceutical marketer, and while visiting the wiki page on pharmaceutical marketing, I found that someone has removed all external links except some links to some journals which need subscriptions ... I tried to returned the external links back as they are very useful to this subject i.e. pharmaceutical marketing, but started to return it back, I returned back to Wiki policy and returned back them without Linkedin group ... but you came and removed these useful links again ... esp. the links which contain analysis on pharmaceutical advertisements and medical claims ... hope to return them back as they are really useful to the reader. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 188.55.207.42 (talk) 04:17, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I don't think those links are appropriate per WP:ELNO, but I see that you have already added them back. Deli nk (talk) 21:02, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your excellent work removing promotional links. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) (if I write on your page reply on mine) 14:51, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Good afternoon. Perhaps a newbish question I know, but I noticed you posted a link on a warning I'd left someone, over on https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A122.167.209.18&diff=579114367&oldid=579106498 I wasn't sure what this link actually is. I take it from your history on the talk page here that you're not leaving spam, so can I query what this is? Many thanks. Justin.Parallax (talk) 15:13, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

This is a method used by WP:WikiProject Spam to track spammers. When a link like spam.example.com is added to the user talk page of someone who has been spamming, this makes it easier to track a spammer who is using multiple accounts or IPs. They can then be found by using the Special:Linksearch tool. (Like this for the link in question here). The link itself does not benefit the spammer because the "spam" prefix makes it a non-functional link. Deli nk (talk) 17:03, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Edit summaries

With edits such as this one, it would be helpful if you give a reason in the edit summary, such as "removing linkspam". Thanks. Axl ¤ [Talk] 03:01, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Lamb and Mutton Edit

Hi there.Deli nk I did not make this edit. Neither did anyone else on this unshared computer.It is a mystery to me.So far as I can see someone made an attempt to add two pics.These are a mystery to me as well. All the best Robert aka Notafly (talk) 11:51, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't know what you are referring to. Can you specify which edit this is about? Deli nk (talk) 00:22, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Greetings Deli nk I received a message asking me to refrain from making unconstructive edits to Lamb and mutton from my IPC address. Supposedly from you.It reads "User talk:86.174.117.52 Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Lamb and mutton. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)"Notafly (talk) 14:43, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

I see now. I left that message about a year ago because a vandalous edit was made from that IP address back then. Most likely your ISP has simply assigned you an IP address that was previously used by someone else and you can simply ignore the message on the IP talk page. Deli nk (talk) 03:21, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Thankyou for the clarification. And a happy New Year Notafly (talk) 12:11, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi why did you remove my addition? I was being factual - please refer to the links provided. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.83.208.177 (talk) 21:15, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

The fact that there was a TV show about it isn't relevant to the article. If, however, there is relevant info presented in the program that isn't yet in the Wikipedia article, then adding that information might be helpful. Deli nk (talk) 21:18, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

ok but citing the information reported by those who made the documentary may be viewed as biased as opposed to just pointing to the documentary so people can make up their own mind? maybe I should have said something along these lines: "there exist a documentary..." ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.83.208.177 (talk) 21:23, 11 February 2014 (UTC)

I think the documentary itself is not relevant to the article. If the show can be considered a reliable source (see WP:RS for details), then it should be fine to use it as a source of information, but it's not really the job of an encyclopedia article's text to point the reader elsewhere. Deli nk (talk)

slotozilla.com spam

Hi! You reverted my edit on Online Gambling page. Why? I found 2 broken links there, so instead of just removing them I found the replacement with the same content. First link was replaced with Forbes article which previously was posted on other source. The second link, content for that was lost, so I found content on WebArchive and upload it "as it was" to Slotozilla.com. And one more thing: Why did you call my source a spam? It is offensive, and is not true. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rdoroshenko (talk • contribs) 03:25, 19 April 2014 (UTC)

Your edits simply look like an effort to promote the website slotozilla.com. I'm not the only one with that perception either, considering that your edits have also been reverted by others and the article you created about slotozilla was deleted as "unambiguous advertising". Deli nk (talk)

First of all, don't look at my previous failures because when I was creating the page about Slotozilla brand , I didn't know about that fact that you should be more popular (how ppl explained it to me) to get article about yourself in Wikipedia. Secondly, I know that gambling related websites are usually associated with spam and something bad, BUT here is why Slotozilla.com is not like them:

1. All games on the website are totally free, and ONLY available in "for fun" mode

2. We just provide screenshots, video reviews and information about games.

3. Slotozilla.com is not loaded with gambling ads or anything like that.

4. Our website is reputable and has more than 100K unique visitors monthly

Now, about the link you deleted. Did you saw sources linked from that page? Loaded with commercial, some information is out-of-date already. And I decided to fix two broken links, I found information on the Internet to replace only one of them, so about the second one, I recreated information it was previously linked to, on my source. It's normal practice, and I don't see the reason to keep dead and not useful link instead of putting my normal link.

To end with something smarty, I'd like to say: as I was usually told, Wikipedia is for simple unbiased information, and attitude towards this or that topic should not be a reason to be against of any particular resource.

I see your point, but the fact remains that Wikipedia policy says you shouldn't be linking to websites that you are associated with. Deli nk (talk)

A kitten for you!

^_^

Rdoroshenko (talk) 13:28, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2014 (UTC)

Adding my reply on your comment from few days ago...

"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 websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. [1] [2] Deli nk (talk) 14:59, 7 May 2014 (UTC)"

Here is what I think about your comment/edit:

1. If I tried to give more power (knowledge) to a particular page with external valuable resources doesn't mean automatically that I'm a spammer. I'm suggesting to visit again link added to nutrition (talking about guide and additional resource, not some spammy article written for selling or else). Here it is: http://www.ecellulitis.com/diet-and-nutrition/nutrition-101-a-guide-to-everyday-nutrition/. If you think that article which is well researched and written over a month from a qualified medical practitioner spam, we're done our discussion.

2. I know what "nofollow" link attribute means (Matt Cuts from Google made few great videos about this topic,) and I'm aware what does mean. Please do not build your reputation with automatic messages to other members, rather read their updates and discuss about improving quality and user experience.

Wish you best luck in your future editing!


If you want to — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnWilliams2011 (talk • contribs) 12:00, 9 May 2014 (UTC)

Your suspicions

You tagged an ip as a suspected sock of User:Jenzb (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs). I think you are likely correct but unless you start a wp:SPI it won't matter. This smells like a rather special spammer, given the business of Page One Power is all about link spamming. LeadSongDog come howl! 04:22, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

SPI won't connect an IP to username, so that won't help either. I put the tag there mostly to alert others to the connection. Deli nk (talk) 11:25, 1 May 2014 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2013 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you so much for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date medical information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do!

We are wondering about the educational background of our top medical editors. Would you please complete a quick 5-question survey? (please only fill this out if you received the award)

Thanks again :) --Ocaasi, Doc James and the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation

Self-Promotional

Dear Deli nk,

First I want to say how much I appreciate what you're doing, and keeping this site legitimate. I am trying to improve the page on body language. This is my first time editing a Wikipedia page and it appears that I did a poor job initially! I have made another minor edit as the page could improve significantly. I have just completed 2 years of research on the topic with graduate psychologists at New York University and we've got to start somewhere. Again I appreciate your diligence and will improve the method with which I am editing the pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bldmark (talk • contribs) 14:39, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

Cissus quadrangularis

With due respect to your suggestions, we have removed the external links and added more medical references on uses of Cissus Quadrangularis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 117.237.76.42 (talk • contribs)

I think you have completely misused and misrepresented the sources you added. I have started trying to fix it. Deli nk (talk) 00:34, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Faseeh Shams - Photographer

Hi, Thank you for pointing out the errors in the wikipedia page under discussion in subject. I have added another link to strengthen the subject's proficiency in the field. With regards to the Featureshoot reference, the website mentions the article in the 'sponsored' section, also writes at the bottom of the article if it is a sponsored article and thus is a valid representation of the subject. For example, the following link shows that this article was sponsored. http://www.featureshoot.com/2014/06/photography-jessica-pettway-trip-bright-side-mundane/ RussellSmart (talk) 12:29, 9 July 2014 (UTC)

September 2014

Hi --User:Deli nk, I would like to know why adding the information that the name Darrell means love was not accepted. I consider this valuable information for Wikipedia users. I do understand what the nofollow attribute means and therefore was not intending to promote myself on search engines. Please let me know. Kind regards, User:ResoAU — Preceding undated comment added 23:38, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Every one of your edits to Wikipedia has involved adding links to Huggies websites. This naturally comes across as if your only intention here is to promote the website. That is why I reverted your edits. Deli nk (talk) 11:34, 24 September 2014 (UTC)

Popreligion

Hi- I was trying to create my page for PopReligion, it is a course at my school but I am working on actually filling it with the content. I didn't want to "publish" it yet live, and obviously it looked plain and nothing. I got the message 5 hours too late I guess, could you please un-delete this? I can delete the information bout the school i had just put that in there to test the page! I didn't know it was live. please let me know how i can just put in all of the content first and then make it live? — Preceding unsigned comment added by PopReligion (talk • contribs) 19:00, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator here, so I don't have the capability to undelete a page. It looks like you have a draft at Draft:Religion_in_Popular_Culture though, and that's the best way to prepare content without having it go live . Deli nk (talk) 19:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)

Hotels in London

Hi, just wondered why the citation for low value hotels in London was marked and deleted by you as spam Thundernlightning (talk) 17:46, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

The website has been spammed across Wikipedia articles by multiple editors/socks (for example, User:LJResearch). Deli nk (talk) 20:59, 18 November 2014 (UTC)

Externality

Hey, I just noticed you removed a link that I had added about a month ago. I see why it was considered spam, I was not aware of that rule (thanks for the link). However, I added a significant distinction along with that edit (production vs. consumption externalities) for which the blog really was the best source. In fact this distinction is not made in most textbooks or other sources. As a result, the statement is not verified now. Now, before making any further edits or reverts I just wanted to ask if it is ok to put the source back in for this statement? (Econ404 (talk) 18:20, 20 November 2014 (UTC))

I think the best thing to do is to make this request on the article's talk page. That way regular editors of the article can give their opinion. Deli nk (talk) 18:21, 20 November 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your feedback. I will do that. I take it that it is generally a good idea to make any change requests on the talk page first, before editing the actual article? (Econ404 (talk) 18:57, 20 November 2014 (UTC))
Actually, please feel free to edit Wikipedia articles without first making change requests on the talk page. If you encounter any kind of disagreement or would like input from other editors for any reason, using the talk page is then a good idea. The general concept is outlined at Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. Deli nk (talk) 19:13, 20 November 2014 (UTC)

Artful Learning

Will appreciate if you can get the content referred by educationist as for the genuineness of the entry. Artful Learning is an established model in US and you have thousands of references online and offline. My intent is to give the right place and not promote any business. Sunil Reddy 16:21, 26 November 2014 (UTC)Sunil

It's not clear to me that the school is notable and your edits appear merely promotional. This is a case where Wikipedia:Write the article first probably applies. Deli nk (talk) 14:20, 30 November 2014 (UTC)

Brownie (camera)

Can you please explain why you eliminated the external link addition to a relevant Facebook Group page? Did I violate some Wiki protocol unwittingly? Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cfhosford (talk • contribs) 17:43, 10 December 2014 (UTC)

In general, links to social media sites like Facebook fan sites aren't appropriate. Details can be found at WP:ELNO. Deli nk (talk) 00:50, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Safe mode

I had edited this page earlier and added 'Android (operating system)' in the 'Background' sub-heading since Android as an OS also has a safe mode feature. Now, since I made this addition I added an external link to a post which explains Android Safe mode. I don't see anything wrong with that as it is a relevant link and not meant for any promotional stuff. However, the link was removed. I won't be adding it again. People who want to know more on Android Safe mode can Google it I suppose. Arpitroy (talk) 21:37, 13 December 2014 (UTC)

Seasonal Greets!

Merry Christmas and a Prosperous 2015!!!

Hello Deli nk, may you be surrounded by peace, success and happiness on this seasonal occasion. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Sending you a heartfelt and warm greetings for Christmas and New Year 2015.
Happy editing,
 !dea4u  09:24, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Spread the love by adding {{subst:Seasonal Greetings}} to other user talk pages.

User talk:Jamesinfotech

Sorry, I didn't see that the linksummary template was something you had just added, I thought it was part of the user's spam. What's its purpose? JohnCD (talk) 22:01, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

It's a way of tracking whether a link is being spammed by more than one accounts or IPs. For example, if you use Special:Linksearch to search for ibraggiotti.com, you'll find that the link has also been added by User talk:24.47.55.234 as well as Jamesinfotech. If a link shows up as having been spammed by multiple editors/IPs, then blacklisting the link can be considered. Deli nk (talk) 22:07, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

Interview for The Signpost

This is being sent to you as a member of WikiProject Articles for creation

The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Articles for creation for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Thanks, Rcsprinter123 (gas) @ 20:56, 4 January 2015 (UTC)

Dineshballia1

Dineshballia1, whom you warned on his/her talk page, continues to add commercial spam links. —Anomalocaris (talk) 04:31, 12 January 2015 (UTC)

I gave them a final warning. If they do it again, they can be reported to WP:AIV. Deli nk (talk) 19:56, 12 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks! — Anomalocaris (talk) 04:31, 14 January 2015 (UTC)

Black Pepper

Hi. Just to explain my revert of what you did on Black Pepper. This article tends to get switched back and forth between varieties of English. You can see this looking through the history. It started out using UK English (or as best you can estimate, it used 'flavour'), so I have reverted it back to this. No criticism of your intentions intended! --Escape Orbit (Talk) 14:13, 13 January 2015 (UTC)

No problem. I looked more at its current state rather than its history before deciding what to do. But I guess policy suggests that looking at how it started is best. After your edits, though, it is again using a mix of spellings (there are still some colors and flavors in there). Deli nk (talk) 17:30, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks, looks like I missed a few. Think it's sorted now. --Escape Orbit (Talk) 17:47, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Just because a reference is present on 2 pages doesn't make it spam...

I do not see the information nor citations I've added as spam nor inappropriate. I put together genuinely USEFUL data for users, not for promotion. I don't say "Yada Yada, and if you've been in a car accident get a free claim review from a lawyer here". I don't see why the data I compile and present shouldn't be cited. What makes the links inappropriate?

I would love more clarity on exactly how useful something should be before it can be cited as a source.

Regards,

Jason — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaskilgore (talk • contribs) 20:48, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

It appears to me that your sole purpose here is to promote your websites by linking to them. That is what is meant by "refspam". I don't think the website meet criteria for use in articles either as a reference or as an external link (see WP:RS and WP:EL). Furthermore, according to Wikipedia's terms of use, you are required to disclose any financial conflict of interest (such as if you have a financial relationship with or ownership of the websites you are linking to). Deli nk (talk) 21:23, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

"It appears to me..." - You speak precisely. While you might be concerned with what appears to you, my concern is helping and benefitting website users. I'm sorry, but it appears to me that isn't your main concern. You'd rather cut your nose off to spite your face than provide wikipedia users with relevant and useful resources, which saddens me because this makes wikipedia not as helpful as it could be.

I'm not going to make any more edits...neither in words nor citations, since it appears to me that wikipedia doesn't care about its' user experience.

Regards,

Jason — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jaskilgore (talk • contribs) 21:36, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

I challenge the idea that links to your websites you added are useful resources. If you wish to get a third opinion from other editors you may start a discussion on the issue on the relevant article talk pages. Deli nk (talk) 19:04, 17 January 2015 (UTC)

Challenge away. Let's use my above description as a case example. If you would, take 5 minutes to search across the internet to find an answer to "Out of all of the car accidents that occur, about how many of them are rear end collisions?" Either a full fraction or percentage answer will be acceptable...except you cannot use the data put together at rearendcollision.net, the sources from the article there, nor the wikipedia page for rear end collision (which I made the edits to and answers this question). Now after doing that search I want you to tell me how much more useful the wikipedia page is, as well as the citation to the original work. Jaskilgore (talk) 18:15, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

This is something that is best discussed on the article's talk page. Please feel free to make your case for including the link there and see if there is consensus to do so. Deli nk (talk) 21:14, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

pages about corticosteroids

Hi Deli I just saw that you remouved many links i just added on the pages about corticosteroids. The links I added were not about a personnal website but about a website set up by a French Department of Internal Medicine which is specialized in taking care of glucocorticoid-patients. The website is regularly updated about the most up-to-date scientific information on glucocorticoids and can be regarded as a reliable summary of the recent scientific data about the drugs. I did not add likns to be better referenced but to provide to people the best summary of the available medical and scientic about corticosteroids. Is it really impossible to keep some references to the website? best linotte01 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Linotte01 (talk • contribs) 11:38, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

I have started a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine to get additional opinions. The editors there may be able to better evaluate the site. Please feel free to contribute to the discussion there. Regards, Deli nk (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2015 (UTC)

Talking to another user

Please mam i am hiper is best and i am new i dont want to vandalize wikipedia but can u please tell me how to talk to someone please — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hiperisbest (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia can be a bit complicated at first for new users. I would recommend that before you attempt to edit anymore that you read about how Wikipedia works. You can start at Wikipedia:GettingStarted and Help:Contents. For help with interacting with users you can see Help:Using talk pages. I hope this helps. Deli nk (talk) 13:48, 29 January 2015 (UTC)

Careful

Don't use edit summaries like "spammed link"; that sort of implies that you added spam. Maybe "rm spammed link" would be better? DS (talk) 19:53, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

It would have never occurred to me that someone might interpret it that way, but I'll take your suggestion and make sure my edit summary is more clear in the future. Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 20:19, 9 February 2015 (UTC)

Thank

Dear Deli nk,

I wanted to thank you about your cleaning of the "Geosteering" page. Since few months, I couldn't work on it and I saw it modified slowly by several companies to an advertising page on Geosteering services. With your help, this page came back to what it should be. Thanks,

Florent GSS 16:00, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

You're welcome. Deli nk (talk) 16:54, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

My blog

Dont know whats wrong but ur adding my web sites on spam list, visit and check my sites if its spam then do it.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 95.70.210.64 (talk) 15:07, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

I did not add them. If you wish to comment about the content on that page, please feel free to do so. But you may not simply delete other people's comments like that. Deli nk (talk) 15:09, 27 February 2015 (UTC)

References

We at Wikipedia love evidence-based medicine. Please cite high-quality reliable sources. We typically use review articles, major textbooks and position statements of national or international organizations. A list of resources to help edit such articles can be found here. The edit box has a build in citation tool to easily format references based on the PMID or ISBN. WP:MEDHOW walks through editing step by step. We also provide style advice about the structure and content of medicine-related encyclopedia articles. The welcome page is another good place to learn about editing the encyclopedia. If you have any questions, please feel free to drop me a note. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Sorry I see that you were simply formating an already poor ref :-) Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 19:35, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Technical Barnstar
Thanks for edit on 66.175.147.226! Project Bluejacket (talk) 17:12, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Uh... WHAT?!

So i just reported a user and saw your post right before mine... "IP sock of a long-term abuser who repeatedly posts infoboxes about Thomas the Tank Engine characters to articles, talk pages, categories, etc" and literally laughed out loud. That is hilarious. Annoying as hell and def cause for blocking... But hilarious. :-p --Zackmann08 (talk) 19:59, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

You run into people with all kinds of strange obsessions when editing Wikipedia. Hopefully my obsession with protecting Wikipedia from such people isn't too strange itself.  :) Deli nk (talk) 20:02, 27 April 2015 (UTC)

Confused

Hi you deleted the info on my userpage regarding my business:

Apolaki Krav Maga & Dirty Boxing, Waterloo Action Centre, London SE1 7AA 020 3695 0991

I am a bit confused because I was reading the Organization FAQ and it says "On your user page, disclose your relationship to the organization." — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kelinacowell (talk • contribs) 16:13, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Just to be clear, I am not an administrator here and I am not able to delete pages. I only nominated User:Kelinacowell for review by an administrator. The page was actually deleted by User:Anthony Bradbury. When I originally saw the page, it appeared highly promotional in nature. Now that it has been deleted, I can no longer see the page, so I'm going by my memory of the brief look I had at the article and I therefore can't comment on any specifics. In general, your user page should have some information about you and, as you say, it should include any conflicts of interest you may have. That just needs to be done in a non-promotional way. If you have questions about which content specifically was too promotional, you'll have to ask Anthony Bradbury or another administrator who can see the deleted text. Additionally, I see that you are adding content to Wikipedia articles using your webpage, apolakidirtyboxing.com, as a reference. That could also be seen as self-promotional and contrary to Wikipedia's conflict of interest policies. I would strongly discourage you from continuing to do so. I hope this helps, Deli nk (talk) 19:17, 29 April 2015 (UTC)

Reply to your question.

Hi there, yes, it is for a project. (: — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pjay618 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

I left a note at Wikipedia:Education program in case your class needs any guidance. Deli nk (talk) 20:43, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

Lovage

Dear D, Do you want us to contribute to the :en.Wikipedia or not? Your deletion was to my opinion totally unjustified - it did not contain only a sentence fragment but an entire FULL sentence. With kindest regards keep well!--Aristo Class (talk) 15:53, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

The text that I removed from lovage was plagiarized from the source you cited. Wikipedia takes copyright violations seriously and using copied text like that simply isn't permitted (please see Wikipedia:Copyright violations for details). That is why I removed it. As for my comment about a sentence fragment, I was referring to the paragraph that contained only the phrase, "European lovage, lavose, sea parsley," which is clearly a sentence fragment. Deli nk (talk) 17:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
Dear D, How many English names do you expect lovage to have? It has only three - my sentence is therefore NOT fragmented. As for the other text (Properties & Uses), I shall rephrase it (in the next few days-FYI, tomorrow, we have a :el.Wikipedia presentation to the public ), so that it will not be plagiarized, and I hope that it will be accepted/approved and not deleted again. With kind regards --Aristo Class (talk) 18:15, 11 May 2015 (UTC)

Dear D, many thanks for reinstating the "common names" sentence. Furthermore, the "plagiarized" part, has been rephrased and added under the ==Properties & uses==. With kindest regards --Aristo Class (talk) 07:29, 13 May 2015 (UTC)

Dear D, Your message has been well received - You DO NOT want me to contribute to :en:Wikipedia. You therefore have my solemn OATH, that: I shall NEVER repeat NEVER attempt to contribute to :en:Wikipedia, unless YOU change your mind (you totally lack "Good Faith") and publicly express your APOLOGY. May you have a nice day - Good bye! --Aristo Class (talk) 13:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC) P.S. No matter, what you reply (if you reply), kindly be assured that your message shall NEVER be responded by the signee. - Roger-Over! Aristo Class (talk) 13:11, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia takes copyright violations seriously. You are simply not allowed to take material from a copyrighted source and add it to Wikipedia. Even if you make a few small changes, that is still plagiarism. Please have a look at WP:COPYVIO and Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. If there is anything written there that you are not able to understand, please let me know and I will help you. Deli nk (talk) 13:57, 14 May 2015 (UTC)

Kiwi vs kiwifruit

Please provide a citation that kiwi is a misnomer, or that it is considered a misnomer and use the language of the text. I am sure one may exist, but do not revert until you provide. Personaly i think that section of the artical should be removed as it gives no important information, I mean who really cares about this except New Zealanders, and i am sure they already know what is "right". What really matters (and proves what is used in common English) is that if you search for the word Kiwi you see more fruit than birds or people. I can guess you feel strongly about this, so thanks ahead of time. 144.188.128.3 (talk) 22:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

You seem to be mistaken about the edit that I made. I actually removed the wording that said that it was a misnomer. And, no, I don't feel strongly about it either. Both the previous wording and the current wording are fine with me. Deli nk (talk) 11:56, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Hi, thank's for reviewing the external links i posted.

I was not pretty sure if they all gonna fit, but i was 100% for the castleville one.

So i think it should be taken back, users would love external link to the game guides.

All the best, Filip — Preceding unsigned comment added by Filipdavchev (talk • contribs) 03:10, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think it's appropriate. If you disagree, you can use the talk page to suggest adding the link to the article and see what other editors think. Deli nk (talk) 10:45, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Protein Sparing Modified Fast

Hi Deli nk,

Regarding the curl on my recent revision to the previous version of the PSMD, there were some issues with the information, some gaps, and ambiguities, and improperly referenced/lack of scientific references. I have modified, and referenced anything that may be seen as "promotional." I also made the language more formal and objective for the purpose of neutrality.

Edit: I have added references, and made the tone more neutral overall. I cited Lyle McDonald as previously described on wikipedia here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Protein_Sparing_Modified_Fast "The wiki page says that PSMF recommends 1 - 1.5 grams of protein per kilogram. I don't know the source of this but, it should be 1 - 1.5 grams per lean body mass in pounds, not kilograms according to Lyle Mcdonald's rapid fatloss book. So in order to know how much proteïne an individual should take, he should know his lean body mass at front. Then multiply this with 2.2 in order to know this in pounds. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 83.83.31.17 (talk) 13:05, 2 December 2012 (UTC)"

Hope this resolves any issues in the article.

Best, Tom Hickey

In my opinion, it still seems to rely too heavily on one individual's writings. I've left a note at WT:MED to see if anyone there is interested in helping out. Deli nk (talk) 12:06, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Removed link from entomophagy page

Hello,

I have replaced the link you deleted. Bugvivant.com is a frequently updated educational blog and reference website for edible insects. I think this link will be very helpful for users further interested in edible insects as it provides further links to community groups, safety info and current manufacturers of edible insect products.

Thanks, Meghan — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.175.168.173 (talk) 16:29, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm still not sure that it meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion as an external link, and it is probably better to get consensus for adding it first by discussion on the article's talk page. But it's enough of a grey area that I won't remove it again. Deli nk (talk) 16:34, 6 July 2015 (UTC)

14:02:23, 17 July 2015 review of submission by Brandon823


Hope all is well. We have made the edits so the article reads more like an entry in an encyclopedia. Please let me know if you recommend any additional changes.

Thank you in advance for your assistance! Brandon823 (talk) 14:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Brandon823 (talk) 14:02, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

It is certainly less promotional in tone, but I'm not sure the subject meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines for inclusion. A company is only included if it is considered notable by the standard outlined at Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) which states that the subject needs "significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources." That doesn't seem to be the case based on the references currently in the draft article. Deli nk (talk) 12:12, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

July 2015

I did that because the person who deleted it didn't provide a reason in the edit summary. Please remove the warning you gave me. 99.53.112.186 (talk) 20:03, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

I see now. One editor added vandalism, the IP you're referring to properly removed it, and then you restored it. I guess I didn't realize you weren't intentionally restoring vandalism. Deli nk (talk) 20:06, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Castel Sant'Angelo

Hello. Why reverted changes by IP in article of Castel Sant'Angelo? Pope is written with a capital letter: "Pope", not "pope". IP is right. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 16:10, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

That is something that should be discussed on the talk page - there are uses where it should be capitalized and uses where it should not. I'm open to hearing arguments for either in this case. However, the IP has been edit warring against consensus across multiple articles without responding to any attempts at discussion. That behavior is entirely disruptive and unsuitable to the collaborative nature of Wikipedia, necessitating the repeated blocks on the IP addresses he has used and the recent protection of the pages involved. Deli nk (talk) 16:23, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I wrote here. Subtropical-man talk
(en-2) 17:14, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Lead

Technically the lead does not need references as long as the content is supported by the body of the text. We have a whole section on kidney problems from iv contrast here in the article CT_scan#Contrast.

As we realize that most people expect references in the leads of articles, we at Wikiproject medicine now ignore the statement that refs are not needed in the lead and add them. Best Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 05:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

OK, I understand. Thanks for resolving the issue. Deli nk (talk) 11:58, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Reasons Unclear

I got the message of the three links that have been removed.. I just wanna know why they were inappropriate as I was only giving information. For eg in Nepal Earthquake one there was this vast kitchen made by an NGO so i thought it must be mentioned that the relief work was done and everyone was involved in the same..moreover the links I mentioned were not the same you put in my talk page...They reason for writing it to you is not arguing with you that why you have removed the external link but I just wanna know what was wrong in those links as they were informative.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Userwiki0308 (talk • contribs) 06:56, 3 September 2015 (UTC)

Considering that all your edits have involved adding links to the same websites, it appears to me as if you only added information to the articles solely for the purpose of including a link. That type of promotion of external links isn't permitted on Wikipedia. Also, regarding the edit you made to Lavandula, please be aware that claims relating to medical benefits must additionally adhere to guidelines outlined at WP:MEDRS. Deli nk (talk) 12:58, 3 September 2015 (UTC)


Ohh ok i got the point now... I didn't saw that coming.. Thanks for informing that.. I just saw that website and went into deep digging.. will keep that in mind the next time... I just thought that i was adding information and overlooked the point you mentioned.. will see to this in my future edits that i am not doing the same thing — Preceding unsigned comment added by Userwiki0308 (talk • contribs) 06:16, 4 September 2015 (UTC)

Emmental

Considering I was part of the research group into how the holes were formed, I think making that change was required.

You are part of the reason why nobody takes Wikipedia as a serious source in an academic text. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.174.19.151 (talk) 18:43, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Wikipedia is constantly bombarded with vandalism. I help by reverting as much of it as I can. Sometimes I make mistakes. Sorry about my confusion in this case. I have restored your edit. Deli nk (talk) 19:05, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Apologies

Sorry for the unwarranted template warning earlier. I was a bit hasty in trying to resolve the edit warring and sent it to you by mistake. Cyclonebiskit (talk) 15:19, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

No worries. I wasn't offended or anything like that - I just thought it was unnecessary. I reverted what seemed at first to be vandalism to me and I didn't immediately realize I stumbled into an edit war. Your warning here was not unreasonable. Deli nk (talk) 16:01, 27 September 2015 (UTC)

My edit on the Reddit page

Hey, I'm really sorry about my 'ibutt' edit on the 'Reddit' page. It was an accident. I had intended to do just one edit, correcting the name of the TV show. But I have this chrome extension installed called 'Cloud to Butt' which, as a joke, replaces all instances of 'cloud' with 'butt'. Silly, I know. I had no idea that would interfere with edits though. I've removed it now, and I'm making my original edit again which I think is correct. Thanks, and sorry again. Ashwin18 (talk) 18:13, 29 September 2015 (UTC)

That's funny actually.  :) Deli nk (talk) 20:26, 29 September 2015 (UTC)
I know, right? Just wanted to clear that up since I don't vandalize :) Ashwin18 (talk) 06:18, 30 September 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 1 October

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:37, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

Lucasrowej

Sorry about that ... I hadn't looked in on AIV in a long time and should have reviewed the deleted contribs as well. Also, I am surprised the previous blocking admin chose "vandalism-only" as the block reason but only set it to a week ... if you choose any "-only" block reason, it must by definition be indefinite. Daniel Case (talk) 17:19, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

No worries. Perhaps the last admin just mistakenly chose the wrong reason from a drop-down menu. Deli nk (talk) 17:21, 2 October 2015 (UTC)

hello. i understood but those are not my business i just read the information thats what i m trying to learn and doing editing i understand terms and notability but i will learn soon that which tone sounds like advertising.

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hollenderek (talk • contribs) 03:25, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

Can I ask, are you getting paid to write Wikipedia articles? Deli nk (talk) 11:03, 14 October 2015 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

With this ever dramatic world and winter coming, here's a cup of tea to alleviate your day! This e-tea's remains have been e-composted SwisterTwister talk 06:28, 22 October 2015 (UTC)
Thank you, SwisterTwister. It is very much appreciated. Deli nk (talk) 12:22, 22 October 2015 (UTC)

Fig Newtons

I don't understand why you removed the edits for Fig Newtons. The candy distinction is an important one industrially, and the Fig Newtons are an important aspect of the candy making history of Massachusetts (http://www.cambridgehistory.org/discover/candy/nabisco.html). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:8003:FC1D:7803:1A45:8A6D:BF4B (talk) 00:54, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Will you explain why you updated the article please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:645:8003:FC1D:8166:3B12:6099:1B90 (talk) 14:37, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Is there any normal definition of "candy" which encompasses Fig Newtons? Deli nk (talk) 17:42, 26 October 2015 (UTC)

Underline

Hello! My teacher wanted to show us that Wikipedia can be easily changed, so he changed underline. Jhjujhju123211 (talk) 04:24, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

@Jhjujhju123211: Please let your teacher know that it is inappropriate to vandalize Wikipedia even in an attempt teach. Violating the Terms of Use of a website in order to make a point to students is simply unethical. Deli nk (talk) 12:15, 8 November 2015 (UTC)

JB

The source was there over 6 years ago.... and it's still there. Choo Wate was something he was called on the tv show many times also. The person that edited that and sourced it long ago is correct and i was just simply trying to re-fix it. It should be re-added... may I? ```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.235.15.9 (talk) 03:56, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, none of the three references in the article even mention "Choo Wate". Can you specify which source currently in the article you are referring to? Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 13:21, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Actually i don't even see in any article where he's called Bowser J Bowser. I know he also was nicknamed Do-Do also (because of how he sang at the end of the show) but i can't find an article that says that or I would include that too. I know it was about 6 years ago, but the article is probably dead now and can't be found. I'm checking though! :) 71.235.15.9 (talk) 22:54, 10 November 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. 71.235.15.9's edits definitely seem consistent with what is described at the LTA page. Deli nk (talk) 13:43, 25 November 2015 (UTC)

November 2015 newsletter

The WikiProject Food and Drink Newsletter
Volume III, no. 3, September–November 2015

Note: To opt out from receiving future newsletters, please click here for instructions.                                      

Project News

  • Potential upcoming project page changes by WikiProject X. Category discussions at CfD. (more below)
— View by clicking [show] —


  • WikiProject X may begin pilot testing to refine WikiProject Food and Drink's project's pages. A recent discussion regarding this occurred at the project talk page here.
  • During September–October 2015, several food and drink categories have been discussed at Categories for discussion. Notices for these discussions are sometimes posted at the project's talk page. Notice about a new discussion was recently posted at the project talk page on 8 November 2015.
  • There are presently 3,658 unassessed Food and drink articles. Assistance in reducing this number would be appreciated.
  • Please see the project's Tasks and To do sections for project and article tasks, and please update the lists by adding new entries and removing resolved or outdated ones.

Article alerts

— View by clicking [show] —

Wikipedia:WikiProject Food and drink/Article alerts

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

Curabitur pretium tincidunt lacus. Nulla gravida orci a odio. Nullam varius, turpis et commodo pharetra, est eros bibendum elit, nec luctus magna felis sollicitudin mauris. Integer in mauris eu nibh euismod gravida. Duis ac tellus et risus vulputate vehicula. Donec lobortis risus a elit. Etiam tempor. Ut ullamcorper, ligula eu tempor congue, eros est euismod turpis, id tincidunt sapien risus a quam. Maecenas fermentum consequat mi. Donec fermentum. Pellentesque malesuada nulla a mi. Duis sapien sem, aliquet nec, commodo eget, consequat quis, neque. Aliquam faucibus, elit ut dictum aliquet, felis nisl adipiscing sapien, sed malesuada diam lacus eget erat. Cras mollis scelerisque nunc. Nullam arcu. Aliquam consequat. Curabitur augue lorem, dapibus quis, laoreet et, pretium ac, nisi. Aenean magna nisl, mollis quis, molestie eu, feugiat in, orci. In hac habitasse platea dictumst.

Fusce convallis, mauris imperdiet gravida bibendum, nisl turpis suscipit mauris, sed placerat ipsum urna sed risus. In convallis tellus a mauris. Curabitur non elit ut libero tristique sodales. Mauris a lacus. Donec mattis semper leo. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Vivamus facilisis diam at odio. Mauris dictum, nisi eget consequat elementum, lacus ligula molestie metus, non feugiat orci magna ac sem. Donec turpis. Donec vitae metus. Morbi tristique neque eu mauris. Quisque gravida ipsum non sapien. Proin turpis lacus, scelerisque vitae, elementum at, lobortis ac, quam. Aliquam dictum eleifend risus. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Etiam sit amet diam. Suspendisse odio. Suspendisse nunc. In semper bibendum libero.

Proin nonummy, lacus eget pulvinar lacinia, pede felis dignissim leo, vitae tristique magna lacus sit amet eros. Nullam ornare. Praesent odio ligula, dapibus sed, tincidunt eget, dictum ac, nibh. Nam quis lacus. Nunc eleifend molestie velit. Morbi lobortis quam eu velit. Donec euismod vestibulum massa. Donec non lectus. Aliquam commodo lacus sit amet nulla. Cras dignissim elit et augue. Nullam non diam. Pellentesque habitant morbi tristique senectus et netus et malesuada fames ac turpis egestas. In hac habitasse platea dictumst. Aenean vestibulum. Sed lobortis elit quis lectus. Nunc sed lacus at augue bibendum dapibus.
  • Feel free to welcome the new members who have recently joined the project.
— View by clicking [show] —
Onel5969
Valoem
DangerousJXD
The project currently has 83 active members.
— View by clicking [show] —


Past newsletters

Food and drink articles by quality and importance

— View by clicking [show] —
Article statistics
Food and Drink WikiProject
article assessment
Food and drink articles by quality and importance
Quality Importance
Top High Mid Low NA ??? Total
FA 7 15 31 53
FL 2 2 4
FM 143 143
GA 18 31 77 279 405
B 56 233 343 717 86 1,435
C 77 404 998 3,566 540 5,585
Start 22 328 1,676 12,042 3,901 17,969
Stub 17 535 9,026 4,945 14,523
List 12 71 115 544 23 274 1,039
Category 8,924 8,924
Disambig 217 217
File 3,022 3,022
Portal 811 811
Project 440 440
Redirect 10 73 637 2,862 3,582
Template 1,046 1,046
NA 2 21 23
Other 211 211
Assessed 185 1,103 3,832 26,846 17,720 9,746 59,432
Unassessed 14 1,968 1,982
Total 185 1,103 3,832 26,860 17,720 11,714 61,414
WikiWork factors (?) ω = 204,438 Ω = 5.11

  – Sent by Northamerica1000 using mass messaging on 23:45, 13 November 2015 (UTC)

Hygetropin

Hi, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hygetropin - is product info - not spam, update old info

The text was highly promotional in tone and inappropriate for an encyclopedia article. Also, there is no need for separate articles about different HGH products. Deli nk (talk) 13:13, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

wikipedia has many pages about HGH products - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jintropin and others. Hygenehk (talk) 13:18, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

I don't think that page is appropriate either. Deli nk (talk) 13:27, 29 November 2015 (UTC)

Chamomile

I see a bit of a problem over at Chamomile ...perhaps best to point out the conclusion section of that paper before saying " has been scientifically proven". The new editor has had a problem understanding our policies and in comprehending the sources they use. -- Moxy (talk) 21:19, 2 December 2015 (UTC)

Yes, the recent additions to chamomile are indeed problematic. However, I don't have the patience right now to deal with an editor who, based on his talk page and block log, is appears uninterested in collaborative editing and isn't all that willing to abide by policy. Deli nk (talk) 13:59, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

wikipedia

wikepedia is a place where you find the meaning to words — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ethan387 (talk • contribs) 14:50, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reverting the reference-spam by MuhammadWaseemL (talk · contribs). The offending link has since been added to User:XLinkBot which should reduce any further campaigns, and failing that will be blacklisted at WP:SBL. This newly registered account raises eyebrows, as it has immediately gravitated toward promotion of a specific external link, then chastised IP 182.180.122.27 for doing the same, and then created a content fork on an article currently being considered for deletion at WP:AFD. I am afraid that WP:SPI may be a next step. Please do not hesitate to contact me should you run into further instances of these links or similar. Regards, Yamaguchi先生 (talk) 20:53, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for updating me on the situation. Deli nk (talk) 21:25, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi Deli nk

Did our new contributions to the IP Code page break any guidelines? We did place one reference back to a page on our site that holds similar information to our Wikipedia contribution - isn't that suitable as a reference?

We feel that the IP Code page is lacking in information regarding the fact that Ingress Protection ratings are now used heavily in consumer electronics.

Can we please publish our contributions.

Tuffphones (talk) 14:12, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

It looks like the "edit filter" prevented you from saving the changes you wanted to make to IP Code because your edits included adding an external link to a website that matches your username. Such edits are generally not acceptable because self-promotion is generally looked down upon here. As the note I left on your talk page outlines, editing with a conflict of interest (such as sourcing your edits from a website that you own) can be tricky and the guidelines that note link to should be helpful. Also, usernames are not permitted to match the name of a website, so it is likely that you'll be asked to sign up with a different username. I don't know that much about the topic area of IP Code, so I'm afraid I can't be too helpful on the merits of the actual information you were trying to add to the article. Cheers, Deli nk (talk) 14:31, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi Deli nk,

I see, I didn't realise that was the case with matching usernames/domain names etc.

I'll try it from a different account. I can assure you that the information is all high quality and above board. We pride ourselves on writing relevant content on and off our website.

As mentioned previously the IP Code page was lacking information so we felt it pertinent to update it.

Kind regards,

Tuffphones (talk) 14:42, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Careful :-)

Make sure that your use of rollback includes an edit summary if it's not blatant vandalism. Your use of rollback here did not include one. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:45, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't believe there was anything wrong with either the use of rollback or with the edit summary in that case. But thanks for the friendly warning. Deli nk (talk) 02:49, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

What is a "joe job"?

I mean, I know what the term means, but I can't understand why did you call my edit a "joe job". Who'd be the victim? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 201.68.130.35 (talk) 01:38, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

There's no reason to play dumb. Deli nk (talk) 02:48, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
I'm not playing dumb, lol. I'm just not a native English speaker. I had to search what a "joe job" was on the Internet. I readed about it and it seemed to be all about fake spams on e-mails, so I simply can't figure out how it happens here.201.68.130.35 (talk) 19:16, 23 February 2016 (UTC)
Nevermind my edit summary then and just don't vandalize the article any more.Deli nk (talk) 00:23, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Okay! I'm sorry. I thought it'd be fun.
PS.: This new IP is from my mobile connection.177.167.50.187 (talk) 05:49, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

COI edit requests for Splunk

Hi there, I noticed you've edited the article for Splunk a few times, and I'm hoping you can lend me a hand. I work for a communications firm that represents Splunk and I've made a few suggestions for improving the article on its Talk page. If you get a moment to take a look and share your feedback, I'd really appreciate the help! Thanks, Mary Gaulke (talk) 01:37, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Soory, it's not really my area of interest and my edits to the article have moslty been simple cleanup rather than editing content.Deli nk (talk) 03:20, 25 February 2016 (UTC)
Gotcha — thanks for your quick reply! Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:14, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into the local language
The Cure Award
In 2015 you were one of the top 300 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs, and we would love to collaborate further.

Thanks again :) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 03:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Help adding new Alliant Brand Logo?

Hi there,

I saw you were the most recent editor to the Alliant Credit Union page. I work in marketing here and am not sure how to add the new logo (which you can find on our website, social channels etc. I tried uploading it but think it may have been too big?

I know there needs to be a separation between church & state within Wikipedia but since adding the correct logo seems very factual, I hope it is alright that I am contacting you.

Thanks, Alissa (agreen@alliantcreditunion.com) — Preceding unsigned comment added by AlissaGreen (talk • contribs) 23:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

I've never uploaded an image before, so I don't know the process and can't help you determine what went wrong. You might try using Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard or ask for assistance at Wikipedia:Help desk. Deli nk (talk) 13:56, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Tyson Foods Edit Request

Hi Deli nk! I noticed you're a member of WikiProject Food and Drink and have also generated a number of edits on the Tyson Foods page, so I was hoping you might be able to help with an edit to that page as I have a COI. I reached out via the Talk Page to change the website in the Infobox from Tyson.com (chicken brand) to TysonFoods.com (corporate brand). Other editors responded with the opinion Tyson.com was more useful, but the Wikipedia entry is devoted to the corporate brand not just the chicken brand. It's similar to PepsiCo and Pepsi structure for corporate site to specific brand site. The corporate site, TysonFoods.com, is cited in news articles and also includes information for investors, media, those looking for careers, etc. that the chicken brand does not. I would greatly appreciate any assistance and would be happy to discuss further. Thank you for any consideration! Rgoodman85 (talk) 18:29, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia users could be interested in further information about either the corporation or its products. Wikipedia should therefore use the link that is most broadly useful. Since http://www.tyson.com appears to be a "top level" site with prominent links in large red boxes ("Consumer", linking to http://www.tyson.com/Home.aspx, and "Company", linking to http://www.tysonfoods.com) to direct the reader to whichever topic they are seeking, in my opinion, that website is most useful to link to from the Wikipedia article. Deli nk (talk) 19:09, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the quick reply and your time. For clarity's sake, could we consider having two website links in the infobox? With the first directing to the corporate website, TysonFoods.com, and the second directing to the chicken brand with a bit more consumer focus? This would provide the overarching Wikipedia page's website link and could remove a step for Wikipedia users. Thanks again for the discussion. Rgoodman85 (talk) 19:53, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
I personally wouldn't object to both links. It's something you can suggest on the article's talk page. Deli nk (talk) 20:46, 16 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks, Deli nk. I've added this suggestion to the talk page so hopefully I can continue the conversation there. I appreciate your time! Rgoodman85 (talk) 17:18, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

you are so mean, im adding relevant links to add more related content but you regarded as a spam. how can u define spam? do some googling: https://www.google.com/search?q=spam+means&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

see and read it, spam = irrelevant or inappropriate messages sent on the Internet.

i think you define spam based on your very own dictionary

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Axa2016 (talk • contribs) 18:11, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Please have a look at Wikipedia's policy regarding external links at WP:EL. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 18:41, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

Why you didn't message to warn me 1st about it? you came out and ping all the major search engine to regard all my sites as spam sites? why you so mean, i build my business for many years, and you could ruin it in just 1 day, how can i feed my family — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axa2016 (talk • contribs) 04:04, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but you seem to be mistaken about what I did. Since I disagreed with your additions of external links to various Wikipedia articles, I simply removed them and notified you on your talk page with a standardized warning. I did not contact any search engines and Wikipedia talk pages are given by default the "no follow" attribute that prevents search engines from indexing them, affecting search engine rankings, etc. Deli nk (talk) 19:08, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Your user page

So, I've noticed that you've been tagging your user page for deletion when it gets vandalized, and then recreating it shortly afterwards. There's nothing wrong with that, per se, but it's got to be annoying, and I can't help thinking that semi-protection or (if you only edit your user page very infrequently) full protection would be a better fit. I'd be happy to do either. —Cryptic 12:57, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

I just happen to like a clean user page history. If you are willing to semi-protect it, that would nice. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 12:58, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Recommendation on Gracenote page edits

Hi Deli nk,

Wanted to ask for your recommendation on the edits recently made to the Gracenote page. There have been a number of big changes to the company over the past few years and my updates on employee count, business focus, product offerings, customers, etc provide an accurate snapshot of enterprise's current state. But I guess the edits sounded overly promotional. So a few questions for you. Was there specific content you found to be problematic? Is it a matter of presenting the facts in more objective language? Any recommendations you can share would be greatly appreciated as I try to update the page. Many thanks for your feedback and advice.

CA Road Rider (talk) 04:11, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I'm assuming that you are the same person who edited using the IP address 173.73.242.76. I undid those edits because they contained text that was highly promotional in tone and content. With phrases such as "help its customers provide engaging entertainment experiences by connecting their end users to the digital media they love" and "a company with broad, deep and rich music and video datasets" (to note just a few) and with the use of stylized trademarks such as "MusicID®" and "Rhythm™", it comes across as if it was written by a PR person whose job it is to hype the company. One of the core principles of Wikipedia is that it is written from a neutral point of view and those edits clearly were at odds with that principle. I would recommend that you have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines which seem to apply here. Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure may also be relevant as well. Deli nk (talk) 23:18, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello Deli nk, Could you please let me know which pages were affected by your recent edits. Thanks, User:Indore study —Preceding undated comment added 03:19, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

I have undone all your edits where you have added inappropriate external links. Deli nk (talk) 11:13, 16 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey Deli nk

Did as you requested and added a new section in the talk portion of Wedding Photography.

Hope I provided some good insight about how to improve the page.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Luke Edmonson (talk • contribs) 20:57, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Insight from someone in the industry is definitely good, but I think that if you would like to see changes made to the article, you'll have to make some specific suggestions. Deli nk (talk) 18:30, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Reversion at sidewalk

Hi Deli nk, I noticed you reverted my reversion of what I considered to be probable vandalism at sidewalk, without leaving an edit summary or a message or warning on my talk page. Please advise. Ibadibam (talk) 18:42, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, that was entirely unintentional. I don't know how it happened - I didn't even realize that I did it. I have now reverted back to your version. Deli nk (talk) 18:47, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Ok, sounds good! Ibadibam (talk) 18:51, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Oleocanthal

Hi, You mention "removed highly promotional section and the See also section which just listed an item already linked in the text)" Maybe it was not the right article to add it into. Maybe the one should have been https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oleocanthal where actually there is no method of testing it, and the University of Athens method of Aristoleo would be more appropriate.

If you would prefer links to something else, other than the "product" of Aristoleo (test), and/or I should write a separate page for it (was hoping that the creators of it would do that), please let me know.

Anyway, thank you for your helpful tips, and please advise. Angello.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Angellogabriel (talk • contribs) 19:21, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

To me, the tone of your edit, in particular, phrases such as "innovative analytical tool" and "marketed as Aristoleo (patented)", came across as highly promotional. If it could be rewritten to be more factual and neutral in wording, I wouldn't object to its addition. Deli nk (talk) 15:18, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks for the tip. See how the next one will look to you. :-) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Angellogabriel (talk • contribs) 16:14, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

References

Hello,

You removed a ref I put in when editing an article, I thought refs were supposed to be used to cite sources? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.234.153.253 (talk) 17:51, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia content should be based on reliable references. I do not believe that nestandglow.com qualifies. Deli nk (talk) 18:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Apology

Hello. I just wanted to apologize for this revert. It was purely accidental, I got careless dragging around the touch screen. So, sorry! Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 16:53, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

No worries. I've done the same on occasion too. Deli nk (talk) 17:12, 18 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit on Ceiling fan page.

Just want to let you know that I have reverted your edit. The reason is that the term "stack motor" turned out to be incorrect. It is because all motor are actually stack motor, and I don't see why people has referred to certain kind of motor as "stack motor". Tom Frampton, a person who helped design that kind of motor, says that term "stack motor" turns out to be incorrect. He wants to call it "K55-type" from now on.

Thanks, The Channel of Random (talk) 17:41, 19 May 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia content needs to be based on verifiable sources. Do you have a reference for that? It seems like a bad idea to change the name of something because one person wants to call it something else from now on. Deli nk (talk) 12:40, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Plus-size clothing

Hi, I just wanted to know why my link has been deleted when you can clearly see there are few links same as mine.I just added the link related to the men's plus size fashion.The reason I have add this because all the ref links were women's related,so I thought of adding plus size men's as well. Are only womens in plus sizes?:)

Regards, Humera — Preceding unsigned comment added by Humeraali (talk • contribs) 13:35, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

That external link was not being used as a reference to support any article content. External links should not be used in that way. You can read about Wikipedia's policy regarding external links at Wikipedia:External links. If you feel there are other links in the article that are being used inappropriately, you are free to remove them. Deli nk (talk) 13:54, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Argania

Hi Deli nk,

Thank you for your prompt check and reply.

I'm not sure what was wrong exactly, as the previous (dead) link was pointing to a single pdf about R. Nouaim, whilst the new added url / page included all research Mrs. Nouaim has contributed to. (https://www.arganfarm.com/documments/article-nouaim/)

Can you please pin point me to what was inappropriate so I can correct it?

Kindest regards — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swiri (talk • contribs) 16:06, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

The previous link was to a single article that an editor thought was appropriate to provide for the reader. If the link was broken, finding a functioning alternative link is a good idea. In this case, a link to the journal article at the journal's website is most appropriate. Linking to copies to copyrighted journal articles is not permitted on Wikipedia. As for linking to all the research done by a certain individual, that might be appropriate for an article about that individual, but not for a different article. Also, since you referred to arganfarm.com as your own website, that is why I provided you with information about Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines (in general, you shouldn't add links to your own website). Deli nk (talk) 16:13, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and effort Deli nk.

Indeed, your reply makes perfect sense. All the best :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Swiri (talk • contribs) 21:26, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello Deli nk

Hope you doing well.

I just want to know that what is wrong with the links I have added. I just want to provide the information about different topic on relevant topics. As you can see I have added relavant links that are very useful for the users. Here are the links You removed from the pages:

technicalanalysisofstocks.in: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost • WhosOnMyServer.com • Live link: http://www.technicalanalysisofstocks.in

asxetfs.com.au: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost • WhosOnMyServer.com • Live link: http://www.asxetfs.com.au

hidester.com: Linksearch en - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:fr • MER-C Cross-wiki • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced • COIBot-Local - COIBot-XWiki - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: search • meta • Domain: domaintools • AboutUs.org • DomainsDB.net • Alexa • OnSameHost • WhosOnMyServer.com • Live link: http://www.hidester.com

This all links are very useful for the peron or the users and all are relevant. There are many links added on those topics but you haven't removed that. As I have checked some of them are not relevant but they are still live.

Its a request to you. Please add my links.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Donnasmith321 (talk • contribs) 18:02, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think any of those links are compliant with the policy outlined at WP:EL. And considering your only contributions here have been to add those links to articles, it seems as if you are simply trying to promote those links. If you disagree with me, you are free to use the article talk pages to suggest additions of those links and then add them only if there is consensus among other editors to do so. Deli nk (talk) 18:15, 16 June 2016 (UTC)

Problem?

I am sorry. 31.60.194.38 (talk) 17:14, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Please don't vandalize Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 17:22, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

Name change CrookSideMusic (talk) 15:15, 12 July 2016 (UTC) LG Mack

Hello I am a new user and I've made a few mistakes regarding the name of my page and would like to change all that's needed to retain my page. Please inform me of anything and everything I need to do at your earliest convenience. Thanks Much.

Wikipedia usernames are not permitted to match the name of a business, so it looks like an administrator blocked your account for that reason. You should be able to sign up for an account with a different username. In general, on Wikipedia you shouldn't write about topics with which you have a conflict of interest (see WP:COI for details). However, if you wish to create an encyclopedia article about CrookSideMusic (which should be titled CrookSideMusic, not User:CrookSideMusic), please read Wikipedia's guidelines for notability first (WP:GNG and WP:CORP) to see if it qualifies, or the article may end up being deleted again anyway. I hope this helps. Deli nk (talk) 17:33, 12 July 2016 (UTC)


SierraSil Question

I'm confused why the changes I've made to the SierraSil listing continue to be reversed. The current listing is very biased. There are a number of positive studies. You can see the list here: https://www.verywell.com/sierrasil-what-you-need-to-know-2551989. My most recent change updated the listing to just state facts. Is there a process to have this reviewed? I'm concerned about the bias in the current content. Thanks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelonioushawke (talk • contribs) 20:45, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

All medical-related content on Wikipedia has to be based on reliable sources as defined here: WP:MEDRS. I do not believe that the sources in some of the recent revisions of that article, or the verywell.com you cite above, qualify as reliable sources using this standard. I believe the sources and the content in the current version of the article is more compliant. If you would like a third opinion, you can talk to editors who have an interest in medical articles at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. Deli nk (talk) 00:14, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick reply. However, I'm confused. Based on this information, the update I posted that was reverted on July 6 should be fine. It only has 2 references and they are a US Patent and Health Canada, Product License. Also, I apologize, I should have been more clear. The verywell.com article references an article posted to the same website as the 2 current references. It is http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1276811/. If not possible to get the update from July 6 approved, could we at least add a reference to the article I've included here? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thelonioushawke (talk • contribs) 16:24, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
The difference is one of secondary sources versus primary sources. Patent applications, product licenses, and the journal article by Miller et al are all primary sources. The two scientific articles currently in the article (by Ameye and by Grover) are secondary sources - independent review articles by subject experts that evaluate and summarize primary research. For Wikipedia articles related to medicine, as outlined in WP:MEDRS, the conclusions of secondary sources outweigh primary sources. Deli nk (talk) 01:11, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Clarification on COI

Hi! This is regarding the article "Pooja Sharma (TV actress)". You are right; by seeing my username anybody might be thinking the possibility of my relationship with the article subject. But, it is not like that. I am not in any way related to the article subject except that of 'fan-idol' relationship and it is also true that we never met and unknown to each other. The truth is - I became a huge fan of the article subject by seeing her debut TV show. Since then I have been watching all her TV shows and also collecting most of the information, picture and video related to her. In fact this becomes my hobby. I have already started administering her 'fan club' under the username "teampoojasharma" for 'twitter' and 'instagram'. I found some of her contemporary and notable TV actresses got a place in 'wikipedia' and so I wanted to create an article on her that is why this article and as usual used the same username. Thank you for your valuable comments and guidance. I shall read the clauses/policies you mentioned and follow. If there is any confusion I shall write to you for help. In future I shall use Talk pages for discussion on changes. Thank you again. If you satisfy my clarification, will you kindly remove the COI template from the article? --Teampoojasharma (talk) 20:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

OK, I understand. Thanks for the clarification. I have removed the COI template from the article and its talk page. Regards, Deli nk (talk) 20:13, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
Thank you for your understanding and quick action. Regards! --Teampoojasharma (talk) 20:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)


Conflict of Interest and Self Promotion on Pterygium (conjunctiva)

Hi Deli nk

I have been accused of adding promotional material onto Wikipedia Pterygium (conjunctiva). I would like to respond to this, commencing with the following quote from the NPOV policy page.

“The NPOV policy does forbid the inclusion of editorial bias, but does not forbid properly sourced bias."

I am a qualified ophthalmologist and have been researching Pterygium for 25 years, and as a result have published over 100 peer reviewed journal articles and research papers based on solid and scientific research methodology. The ophthalmology community consider me as a subject matter expert, with journal editors regularly requesting my revision of any research into pterygium. As a result of my cumulative research on pterygium, I have been awarded the highest degree that the University of Queensland awards, a Doctor of Science in 2015.

As a respected member of the global ophthalmology community, I supported all my edits on Wikipedia with research which is published in books or journals. In the instances I have referenced my own research, again, to remind you it is scientific, therefore neutral, and published research, it is because it is the only research available on the topic. All of these referenced works are in peer reviewed journals and in fact the principal article which describes the world’s largest prospective series of pterygium surgeries was the lead article in the highest ranked clinical ophthalmic journal in the world, “Ophthalmology”.

My goal with editing the Pterygium page was to remove the dangerous content, ie claiming that radiation was a form of treatment, when in fact it is dangerous to the patient’s vision and has long been banned as a method of treatment. And to update the content to reflect current standards and procedures. Yes, I have referenced my own research, but it is, as stated in the NPOV, ‘properly sourced bias.’


My apologies for the unintended result of appearing promotional. And I request any advice for avoiding that in the future.

L Hirst Lawrence Hirst (talk) 02:19, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I think I will defer to the ongoing conversation at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Pterygium_.28conjunctiva.29_2 and let the more experienced editors handle it from here. Regards, Deli nk (talk) 19:02, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Vegan Alternatives

I removed your A7 tag, because in my opinion having won acclaim from major "in-universe" vegan groups (an award from PETA, endorsement and promotion from Vegan Outreach qualifies as a WP:CCS, as both plausibly true and plausibly leading to enough coverage (albeit in specialist sources) to satisfy GNG.

But after some wikification, cleanup, and Googling, I've grown convinced that GNG is not in fact met here, so I've PRODded the page and notified the page creator. So it's not a big deal, but I wanted to let you know why I removed your tag. Happy patrolling! FourViolas (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

OK, I don't object. Thanks for informing me. Deli nk (talk) 15:00, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
FYI @FourViolas: The prod was removed without explanation by the article's creator, but I still don't think it is notable enough, so I have now listed it at AFD. Deli nk (talk) 10:21, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I did not add any external links, I just rightly categorised it. Kindly spend some time on the article before you blindly remove it and place a tag — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul attick (talk • contribs) 08:56, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I didn't catch that you moved it rather than added it. However, you are incorrect to suggest that I removed it blindly. I don't think it is an acceptable external link. Deli nk (talk) 10:12, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry too...got a bit upset Paul attick (talk) 10:55, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

DrSun message

Hi Deli nk, got your input on my changes related to the stock cube page. I am not affiliated in any way with www.stock-cubes.com. I found them by searching sites describing the recipe and process of stock cubes. I looked at the wikipedia guidelines and I am confused why a generic recipe of stock cubes is not appropriate. People are eager to know what is in their food and a general understanding of a product recipe is needed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DrSun (talk • contribs) 17:04, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

It may be worth adding a discussion of typical ingredients, but I don't think a recipe for a specific product is appropriate - recipes are specifically mentioned at Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not as something to avoided in Wikipedia articles. If you disagree with that policy, you are welcome to discuss a potential change to the policy at Wikipedia talk:What Wikipedia is not. Deli nk (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

unilever

Could you please reword /rewrite the Unilever Salmonella affairs in Israel ? I tried to reword but that entire article is strangely worded. in short there was shortage in stores, people start to spread rumors , Unilever rebuffed everything at first, they later said that there had been a contamination but the contaminated boxes didn't leave the plant and later it was revealed they did leave the plant. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 5.144.58.84 (talk) 10:10, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't know enough about the incident to rewrite the section. That's why I asked on the article's talk page if there was anyone who could figure it out. 11:19, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Re: SPI

Just wanted to let you know that technical data are only held for 90 days - after that, an account is deemed "stale." So a 3.5-month-old account, unfortunately, falls out of the range of CU. Regards, GABgab 01:32, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. For some reason I thought it was more like 6 months. Deli nk (talk) 12:00, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Alcohol Justice

We need to get the word out that Alcohol Justice is a neo-Prohibitionist organization. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B12A:3A1E:49D8:7CBD:CC03:526B (talk) 13:37, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia isn't the place for that kind of advocacy. Deli nk (talk) 13:39, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

Hannah Wants

You changed my citation templates while I was editing, so I had to go over them to retain the rest of the content. That being said, the format I used is correct, and the templates you used are not mandatory. Please do not change them simply dfor the sake of changing them. MSJapan (talk) 18:08, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

That's a funny thing to complain about. Are you going to fix the plainly misformatted references that you restored to the article? Deli nk (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Such as? MSJapan (talk) 18:48, 12 September 2016 (UTC)
Such as the two you fixed in response to my question. Deli nk (talk) 19:10, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

BLP

WTF — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmeshasha (talk • contribs) 20:22, 13 September 2016 (UTC) WHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmeshasha (talk • contribs) 20:20, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

You are repeatedly adding defamatory and inaccurate content to a biography. This is a clear violation of WP:BLP policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Deli nk (talk) 20:34, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

ITS TRUE BUT I WILL WAIT UNTIL ITS CONFIRMED — Preceding unsigned comment added by Itsmeshasha (talk • contribs) 20:37, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello,

Thank you for pointing out. Actually there is no any affiliate link or Promotional link. I just found the link useful as example, so I add it. There is no any intention of spam.

Thank you

Palindrome

Notifying all named accounts who have edited this article this year. There is a discussion of whether this article should contain foreign language palindromes. If you would like to comment the thread is Talk:Palindrome#Non-English_palindromes_2 Meters (talk) 21:06, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade

Who is the master you mentioned here [5]? Meters (talk) 23:14, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Ah, probably whoever is behind User:Salvidrim!/Macy_VG_IP_vandal Meters (talk) 23:21, 12 October 2016 (UTC)
@Meters: Yes, that's the one. I don't know if there is any actual account or SPI associated with this person though. Deli nk (talk) 15:21, 14 October 2016 (UTC)

Cosmetics copyvio

It was a copyvio. I found part of it at a site other than allure magazine. The tip-off is that it was all added in one block by a brand new user. I reverted but you beat me to it. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:37, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

Source for the last sentence. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:37, 23 November 2016 (UTC)

I see - thanks for the info. Deli nk (talk) 12:22, 24 November 2016 (UTC)
Cheers, my friend. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 12:29, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Let's not be overzealous

Your contributions to high school articles are noted, however mass removal of notable alumni sections is questionable. The general rule of thumb is that if a person's WP article confirms his/her attendance at the school in question, it's OK to list him/her as a notable alumna/alumnus. So how about if you review this edit, checking the WP article page for each entry, confirming that each attended Grimsley High School or its predecessor, Greensboro Senior High School, then re-adding those names that have verification of attendance? This is longstanding practice in Wikipedia school articles; let's not make precipitate edits. 32.218.32.82 (talk) 17:14, 11 December 2016 (UTC)

There has been no "mass removal" of alumni sections. There is no overzealousness. Only two articles are involved. No information is being lost. I have simply moved it to the talk page for evaluation. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that its content should be verifiable. Please see WP:V. It is incumbent on the editor who adds content to reference it properly. Content that needs a source but does not have one may be removed. The instructions on the cleanup template {{alumni}} are quite clear: "Please improve this article by removing names that do not have independent reliable sources cited within this article" (emphasis mine). Deli nk (talk) 18:00, 11 December 2016 (UTC)
Thank you both for your thoughts. Actually, cleanup templates are not Wikipedia policy statements, and I just revised the six-year-old {{alumni}} template for a better match to our current policies & guidelines. Inline citations are indeed nice to have, but WP policy does not require them for uncontroversial names whose membership is reliably referenced in their blue-linked WP articles. (See WP:MINREF, WP:LISTBIO, WP:LISTPEOPLE.) Hope this helps. —Patrug (talk) 05:13, 15 December 2016 (UTC)
Thanks for the information. Deli nk (talk) 12:38, 15 December 2016 (UTC)

Just to let you know

Your redirection of Huawei Ascend Mate7 was undone without explanation. I've reverted the unexplained edit and left a note on the IP's talk, but the edit was reverted again, also unexplained. JudgeRM (talk to me) 20:29, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

Sansevieria trifasciata

Regarding your censorship, please explain to me how data from NASA about Sansevieria trifasciata's unique air purifying capabilities are "irrelevant" to the Sansevieria trifasciata wiki page??? How does withholding this information better or benefit anybody??? The page is already so small and lacking of data, why keep it that way??? And why are you CENSORING when you could be CONTRIBUTING??? I know it only takes you a click of the mouse to say "F all your work", but people VOLUNTEER AND CONTRIBUTE THEIR PERSONAL TIME, and you show no respect for that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 103.1.57.224 (talk) 14:05, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

I think you misunderstand the meaning of the word censorship. I also think you have completely misunderstood the edit that I made. The normal editing process on Wikipedia naturally involves both the addition and the removal of content. Both can be beneficial. In this case, the particular details (such as one experiment using 3474 cm² of leaf surface area) aren't relevant - the relevant part is that the plant has been found to purifify the air. What I did was to leave the important conclusion and to remove the irrelevant details. Wikedia isn't a primary source - it's purpose is not to present such research details, but rather to summarize the relevant results. Does that make sense to you? Deli nk (talk) 19:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

I second the above contributor's observations on censorship and repeat his comment "How does withholding this information better or benefit anybody??? " Providing a link to a list of Eco-friendly hotels in France to a page on Environmental friendly hotels is not off subject - quite the contrary. It is no different to having Wikipedia pages on commercial hotel chains linking to the commercial chain's website: and virtually every major hotel chain in the world has a page on Wikipedia. Apparently that's OK, but not a link to a page that lists independent establishments. Double standards.


I don't understand -why you deleted links - it's informative and interesting articles -what are you doing? First read the article and then do your actions — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertBriceNY (talk • contribs)

Your username

Judging by your name, Deli Nk, I take it that your main joy as a self-appointed Wikipedia editor is to De Link – which is destructive rather than constructive and does not help make Wikipedia a more useful resource. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.80.125.26 (talk) 22:01, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

All Wikipedia editors are self-appointed - how could it be otherwise? Regarding external links, please have a look at WP:EL. Some external links are useful and appropriate, some are not. Removing the inappropriate ones is constructive and beneficial to Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 02:12, 15 January 2017 (UTC)


Citation Link:Search engine optimization

Hello Mrs.Deli_nk,

I noticed that you reverted a link which I used as a citation, the one you claimed is an SEO attempt (WIX SEO Hero Challenge). I would just like to add that the link which I replaced returns with an error & does not return ANY results. Yes, sure I might be in an SEO competition, although should this be deleted just because of this fact, rather than providing informative information which no longer existed. Just to let you know, the information which was currently on the dead link can be found verbatim on the citation page I provided. All I am trying to do is provide relevant content and fix links which are broken so it could possibly help someone else. Thank you for your time and consideration.

{{cite web|url=http://forums.searchenginewatch.com/showpost.php?p=2119&postcount=10|title=Who Invented the Term "Search Engine Optimization"?|author=Danny Sullivan|publisher=[[Search Engine Watch]]|date=June 14, 2004|accessdate=May 14, 2007}}

{{cite web|url=https://www.heroseo.pro/seo/seo-hero/seo-hero-the-one-who-coined-the-term-seo/|title=SEO Hero: The Hero Who Coined The Term SEO|author=Christian Shackleton|date=January 17, 2017|accessdate=January 18, 2017}}

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Piobuilleann (talk • contribs)

I don't think it is appropriate for you to try to link to your website for SEO purposes. If the content from searchenginewatch.com has been copied verbatum to heroseo.pro, then that may be a copyright violation and Wikipedia has a policy of not linking to such websites. It is better to try to fix the broken link or use a service such as Wayback Machine. Deli nk (talk) 12:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
To specify, I'm not trying to link a website for SEO purposes, rather it's intent is to provide contextual information which is relevant to the topic at hand and does not error. Piobuilleann (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:27, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
You can start a discussion on the article's talk page to solicit additional opinions. Then if others agree with you, the link can be added to the article; and if not, then it shouldn't. Deli nk (talk) 12:57, 22 January 2017 (UTC)

Сomplaint

All affected from the actions of this member (Deli Nk) write a complaint about shes actions https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:Support_desk - is inadequate and should be Blocked. This user remove new relevant links and back dead links — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertBriceNY (talk • contribs)

The user posting the above would do better not to try to add their own blog to Wikipedia. If it were a useful resource it would not be repeatedly removed by different editors, and trying to form a mob of bullies to complain about it will only serve to make those people look silly. --bonadea contributions talk 08:08, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
My actions are fully consistent with Wikipedia policy. However, if you would like to file a complaint against me, please feel free to do so at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents where administrators will have a look at my behavior. And yours as well. Deli nk (talk) 12:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

I see dead link in article (pdf document) - I found this deleted document and placed it on my server- there were no links to my site! Only deleted pdf file I broke any rules? I corrected only a dead link in page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Architectural_model What we have - dead link again!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobertBriceNY (talk • contribs) 12:55, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

@RobertBriceNY: The reference at hand is an article published in an academic journal. Copying the journal article to your website, making it available from there, and then linking to it from Wikipedia is unethical in my opinion. That is a violation of the author's/publisher's copyrights. I have now fixed the reference so that it properly links to the journal's website. Deli nk (talk) 13:42, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

Not sure if this will even work as I am not proficient in this at all. Someone called 'Jonnygotyback' on here is determined to put false information on a page concerning my old band. They keep doing it and it is very petty to the point of me getting abusive towards them. The photo is awful, there are a thousand better ones. And the information regarding post-split is inaccurate. Even the 'LINKS' used contain no backup. How do I stop them? I just want what is written about me to be true and fair.

Nicky Smith — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicosmith23 (talk • contribs) 17:08, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

I didn't take a close look at the edits in question (just happened to have seen the edits summaries which were inappropriate). Looking now, I agree with your removal of the content which is referenced just to Facebook pages. The photo is not great, but I can understand if someone thinks it's better than nothing. I you have a better photo (taken by someone who is willing to release it into the public domain), that might be the best solution. Also, Wikipedia has some guidelines related to conflicts of interests, such as editing an article about yourself, that you might find helpful as well: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. In general, when there are conflicts like this, the Wikipedia way is to use the article's talk page, talk:Exit Calm in this case, to discuss the issue rather than "edit warring" back and forth. I've left a message for Jimmygotyback to do the same. Deli nk (talk) 17:44, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Whilst it may take 2 to edit war - I am not the editor removing referenced information just because I don't like it. There's no justification for removing it - and it's up the other editor to justify removing referenced content. Also, I notice that Nicky Smith has actually got the band to remove the official press release from Facebook. Luckily I have found a web article that quoted the whole thing. He can bleat on about it being inaccurate all he likes, but has he got a reference for that!? It doesn't work like that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jimmygotyback (talk • contribs) 18:25, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Look, I am going to take the time to explain this properly and Deli nk seems to be a reasonable person so hopefully should see what I am saying. The above user 'Jimmyupthebackpassage' is clearly trying to antagonise me and it is very apparent in the above response. Why insist on putting up that ridiculous picture? there are thousands out there... But not just that - implying it is because I dont like it? Like I am a petulant child? The justification for removing it is simple. 1. I am NOT making any music with the confederate dead - who also are not from London. your references are nonexistent. 2. I took the facebook post down, not the band. 3. Why even have a post split section?? Its empty of many other facts. and 4. Quite simply this is about me, my life. Not yours 'jonnyroundback'... Whoever you are, whatever your problem is, I am sorry but you come acrross as very petty about stuff that really does not concern you at all. 'Luckily' you found another article?? jeez kid.

Please grow up Nicky — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nicosmith23 (talk • contribs) 16:15, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

This dispute regards something outside by area of knowledge. I sympathize with your concerns about an article that relates to you personally - I think the contested content that keeps getting restored should have references more reliable than facebook posts before being added to the article. My suggestion is to seek dispute resolution where knowledgeable third parties can help resolve the issue. Deli nk (talk) 13:27, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

signsny.com

Hi Respective, I'm Pat Foley Hope you are fine!! Actually some of the good and mostly used material I didn't found in this Article so I'm going to add a sign materials page into the external links. I found this site as an informative site about every type of sign material or sign resources and be on the 1st number of google search as well. Please review it and let me know if you agree with me to add this http://www.signsny.com/sign-materials into the external links.Hope you will like and agree to add this into the external part.. Thanks.Pat Foley (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

Personally, I don't think that link is appropriate. It is entirely commercial in nature and contains quite a bit of promotional content. Deli nk (talk) 13:27, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Caviar

Hi Deli, this is Martin of Sheffield. I've just been reverting user 2601:48:c501:69bf:10e6:f4c1:aa66:5186 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) on the Fishwife page. He seems determined to add trivia about the TV show Frasier, and I notice he's added stuff to Caviar which you've been editing. I think it's rubbish, but would like a second opinion, so please have a look and delete it if you agree. Thanks, Martin of Sheffield (talk) 14:09, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. It looks like the IP was blocked from editing due to the disruptive editing. Deli nk (talk) 13:27, 30 January 2017 (UTC)

Self-defense

Hello! I'm new here so I just wanted to make things clear. So in the article "Self defense" I added an external link to a video with parody of self defense with a book. This one - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uRYTaYKsUkE And my edit was reverted. I wonder,why? It was on the topic of self defense and in the section of external links. My nickname is Fedor30001 in case it doesn't show up.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fedor30001 (talk • contribs) 19:53, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

External links should further the educational value of Wikipedia article in some way. A link to a non-notable amateur youtube video joke really isn't appropriate. Deli nk (talk) 20:51, 31 January 2017 (UTC)

The computer who edited the Cannibis page

This computer here is a school computer. What probably happened is that someone here was trolling during free time and edit the page. Yes, we're definitely sure some of the kids here smoke weed in case you're wondering. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.43.123.139 (talk) 17:23, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

That's a common occurrence around here. If you would like to avoid being confused with someone who is vandalizing Wikipedia, I would recommend signing up for an account. Deli nk (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

Josh Morris

Rugby is a different game to rugby league. If you feel there is no primary topic, please move the rugby league player to (rugby league) per MOS and fix all the relevant links.Fleets (talk) 21:33, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Yes, my apologies. Thanks for letting me know. I forgot about that distinction. I'll continue working on the disambiguation with the title correction. Deli nk (talk) 00:22, 14 February 2017 (UTC)
No worries, (rugby) is also the decided MOS for when a player plays both rugby union and rugby league, so it might have confused a few editors on that angle. Much obliged for your efforts in resolving the issue.Fleets (talk) 18:45, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Richard Warshak

Re: Richard Warshak. I appreciate your investment of time and energy in diligently editing the entry about me. As the subject of the page I did not want to make a change on it, even to remove the three template warnings added at the top regarding a contributor with a close connection, words that promote ina subjective manner, and COI and NPOV. But I did want to call your attention to the following. About five years ago a relative updated the page primarily by adding citations to my published work, references, links to other Wikipedia entries, and external links. I shared with her my concern that her identity could cause COI concerns and she has not contributed to the page since 2012. I reviewed the changes she made and find that these reflect a neutral point of view with information that is easily verifiable by consulting the academic journals whose citations she added. She is not the person who created the entry for me and I do not know the identity of the person who did that or made other changes. I see no other COI or BPOV problem on the page and hope that the statements of issues at the top of the page can be removed.Rawars (talk) 11:08, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

I have copied your comment to the ongoing discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#Richard_Warshak and replied there. Deli nk (talk) 14:04, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

Talk:Umami

Would appreciate your review and keeping watch on the issues and behavior of one editor under "Not used in science" and "Umami receptors - Yu study". Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 15:29, 20 February 2017 (UTC)

I have left a comment on the talk page and will keep watch. Deli nk (talk) 15:37, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
@Zefr: It's just blatant trolling now; he's calling the article a hoax and saying it needs to be deleted. He should be just ignored from now on. Deli nk (talk) 20:12, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Following this and agree. As long as the troll remains in Talk, the loud voice is basically innocuous. But if the troll forays back into editing the article, then there would be sufficient concern to request SOCK and/or introduce to WP:MED Talk for further review. Thanks. --Zefr (talk) 20:19, 20 February 2017 (UTC)
Yes, I agree, sorry if I wasn't clear. Ignored at the talk page, reverted at the article. Deli nk (talk) 20:21, 20 February 2017 (UTC)


garlic press and garlic

Hi, my additions are approved with Mean As Custard

Wikipedia content is determined by consensus. Content cannot be approved by any single individual. I see your additions have been removed again by another editor, so it is best if you used the articles' talk pages to discuss your proposed changes to the articles. My concern is that you are using a personal blog as the source, whereas Wikipedia generally does not accept such sites as appropriate references (see WP:RS for details). The fact that every single one of your edits to articles involves adding links to this one blog suggests to me that your purpose here is to attempt to promote this blog. Deli nk (talk) 20:29, 21 February 2017 (UTC)

Your edit at Talk:Bitcoin

Hi, and thank you for your revert at Talk:Bitcoin. I disliked the edit too, but was not sure whether a revert would not be found beginner unfriendly. Ladislav Mecir (talk) 16:40, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, simply reverting might be seen as a little unfriendly, so I have left them a friendly welcome message. Deli nk (talk) 18:11, 24 February 2017 (UTC)

Needs Attention

I believe you've deleted useful / helpful external sources I've added. Please check those again and let me know. Thanks -- (talk)

If you are talking about the link to the clickbait listicle "Instantly Heal Your Sun Tanned Skin with these Top Three Most Effective Home Remedies!" at infohowler.com, then I think you are completely wrong. There is nothing useful or helpful about using that as a reference. Wikipedia requires reliable sources to be used as references. Deli nk (talk) 11:48, 14 March 2017 (UTC)

World Kidney Day

I want to know the guidelines on adding newspaper/website links to the article. Some articles do have a lot of information which wikipedia doesnt. A link to that source could actually diversify the reader's knowledge. In addition, how do we differentiate between which newspaper is credible and acceptable and which is not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by T12345Q (talk • contribs) 08:18, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

@T12345Q: You can have a look at Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources to get a general sense of Wikipedia's guidelines in this area. For the specific link which you added to and I removed from World Kidney Day, there were several issues. You turned the text "World Kidney Day" into an external link to an article titled "Why That iPhone Is Not Worth Your Kidney". The article is only tangentially related and external links should not be used within the text of an article. Please do not do that again. Also, since all your edits involve adding external links to one single website, even after your edits are repeatedly undone by other editors, it appears as if your only purpose here is to promote that website. That is considered spamming and it is likely that you will be blocked from editing if you persist. Deli nk (talk) 12:48, 15 March 2017 (UTC)

Digital radiography

Hello Deli nk, You removed a link from Digital Radiography. It was not SPAM - the original WIKI page mentioned Video Dental Concepts as the first company to introduce Dental Sensors to North American in 1992. I am the webmaster and content writer for Video Dental's website. They indeed were the first according to you WIKI article at dental sensors in 1992 and intraoral cameras in 1989. Can you please leave the link up. Thanks and have a great day.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_radiography#Historical_milestones_for_digital_intraoral_sensors

https://www.videodental.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ultrawebmarketing (talk • contribs) 22:56, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

External links are not permitted within the text of an article. There is typically an "External links" section at the end of the article where appropriate links can be placed (see WP:EL for details). Since you are the owner of the website you have linked to, you should probably have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. Deli nk (talk) 12:59, 28 February 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Deli_nk/archive&oldid=1147983314"