Charleywin

Welcome!

Hello, Charleywin, 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:

float

• Your first article
• The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Editing, policy, conduct, and structure tutorial
• Picture tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Naming conventions
• Manual of Style
• If you're ready for the complete list of Wikipedia documentation, there's also Wikipedia:Topical index.
  
  

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, please be sure to sign your name on Talk and vote pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, or three tildes (~~~) for just your name. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my Talk page. Again, welcome!

— Dismas|^(talk) - 09:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Disclaimers

Along with that information, something a bit more directly pertinent to your recent edits... I think you should have a look at WP:DISCLAIM. Basically it says that we don't put disclaimers in articles. If you think a link should only be viewed by those over 18 years of age, that's fine. But those types of things don't belong in articles. Thanks, Dismas|^(talk) 09:48, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

July 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Erika Eleniak do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. -- JHunterJ (talk) 11:47, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks JHunterJ for some of the edits of Playmates pages, I have read through the guildline to check the details of adding external links. But it sames adding an official Playboy link to a Playmate is acceptable by Wiki rules. Correct me if i am wrong.Cheers Charley DONG (talk) 14:07, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

  Please see Wikipedia:Spam#How not to be a spammer, in particular: contribute cited text, not bare links; don't gratuitously set off our spam radar by adding a link to the top of an unordered list, adding many links to (or mentions of) the same site or product, or adding the same link to many articles. If your product [link] is truly relevant to an article, others will agree—try the talk page [each individual article's, not mine]. -- JHunterJ (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Alicia Rickter. 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. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. -- JHunterJ (talk) 13:24, 7 July 2008 (UTC)

Thanks JHunterJ, got the point 'adding the same link to many articles.' is a spam! Thanks! Playboy Fans (talk) 08:47, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Re: Playboy Enterprises

First of all, thanks for asking how to improve rather than getting frustrated and quitting. As for the links, it's not that they link to a UK/EU domain. It's not that at all. I removed the links to each individual playmates pages on playboy.co.uk because of the following from WP:EL:

Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article.

And per WP:NOT:

Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files

item 4: Mere collections of photographs or media files with no text to go with the articles

And as for the pages which had things like "What XX feels about XX topic", those are nothing more than just yet another interview with the subject. We don't compile lists of interviews that happen to be posted on the net per WP:NOT. If the links in question could be used for sources of encyclopedic information about the subject, then they are fine to use as references but not simply external links. And before you go using them as references, putting XX's thoughts on men or politics or fashion into the article wouldn't really belong either since these women aren't established experts in those fields. If one were to run for congress and politics were a major part of their life, then their thoughts on politics would be both relevant and encyclopedic and therefore those links could be used as references.

If you have any questions about this, please, let me know. I'll be happy to answer them. Dismas|^(talk) 13:04, 8 July 2008 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Playboyuk.JPG

Thanks for uploading File:Playboyuk.JPG. You've indicated that the image meets Wikipedia's criteria for non-free content, but there is no explanation of why it meets those criteria. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. If you have any questions, please post them at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

Thank you for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Dasha Astafieva

I have reverted your edit to the Dasha Astafieva article. The web site field of the Playmate infobox is intended for the Playmate's official site and NOT a site belonging to Playboy about the Playmate. Dismas|^(talk) 16:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Jessicaburciaga.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Jessicaburciaga.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Dismas|^(talk) 17:52, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:Playboylogo1.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Playboylogo1.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Dismas|^(talk) 17:53, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Playboy.co.uk

Why do you keep adding links to Playboy.co.uk to articles about American Playboy models? Your most confusing edit thus far was when you replaced the official site link for Playboy UK in the Playboy UK article to a link to just one model, Lucy Becker. --Dismas|^(talk) 14:05, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry,it's a mistake for the Playboy UK URL edit. Again, I believe the models' profile page on playboy.co.uk are having more information than the playboy.com one. Playboy Fans (talk) 14:44, 6 March 2009 (UTC)