Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to mug. 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 web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site 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 article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 11:36, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Re:mug
editYour edits obviously promoted a certain company, which you might even belong to, and thus didn't go along with basic wikipedia policies. Materialscientist (talk) 12:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
--
Noted, albeit I don't work for Brugo - though my brother does.
Can you and I diffrenciate between the image and the text (which I can reference in other ways - and is founded on Brugo wanting to describe the changes in the product since the 1980's - you should have seen the first draft! ). My brother's asked me to help with the text as a way of it becoming less driven by Brugo. I think this is an honourable intention - this text is not written in a advitorial manner (aside me being sloppy in my referencing).
The current image Skelton Jug is NOT a Thermal Mug - the Brugo Mug is! This is a matter of fact.
The existing Skelton image and of equal weight to the Brugo Image, as it equally refers to a named product. If you are to remain consistent with your position you must either remove the Thermal Jug, or help me to understand how I can improve presented image.
How about this one - I could crop it more closely:
Brugo (talk) 12:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, just read the note at the top of your talk page - hope this is OK Brugo (talk) 13:09, 8 December 2010 (UTC)