Kajiny

Recent edits

Hello. I see you've been adding sources to articles, which is always appreciated. However, you do not seem to be familiar with correct footnoting. For a reference to work as a footnote (as opposed to an inline external link, which should not be used), at the very least you have to surround the link with <ref> and </ref>. For the reference to have a title, you have to use brackets like this: [URL title]. In other words, a bare-bones citation should look like this: <ref>[www.google.com Google]</ref> Does that make sense? Do you mind correcting your edits then? Thanks!  Mbinebri  ^{talk ←} 16:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Okay, what's the problem here? You're still using an incorrect citation style and apparently not even checking to see if the source you're using is already being used in the article.  Mbinebri  ^{talk ←} 17:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, did not see these messages until now. Is it okay if I put my links in the reference section?

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Kajiny (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

your reason here - I wasn't how to source correctly or use footnotes. I am now aware how to use footnotes and will use them when editing a page in the future.

Decline reason:

The issue isn't formatting of footnotes. The issue is you repeatedly adding spam references. You won't be unblocked unless you agree to stop spamming. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 20:28, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Kajiny (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I understand that the way I was linking to the website was considered spamming, and in the future I will contribute cited text as opposed to bare links. I have read over the spam guidelines (was very unfamiliar with editing or adding to the site previously) and understand your intentions to defer from individual promotion of products, sites, etc. I hope to make correct contributions as we move forward.

1. Review your intentions. Wikipedia is not a space for personal promotion or the promotion of products, services, web sites, fandoms, ideologies, or other memes. If you are here to tell readers how great something is, or to get exposure for an idea or product that nobody has heard of yet, you are in the wrong place. Likewise, if you are here to make sure that the famous Wikipedia cites you as the authority on something (and possibly pull up your sagging PageRank) you will probably be disappointed, because Wikipedia uses nofollow on all external links, thereby causing search engines to effectively ignore them.
2. Contribute cited text, not bare links. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm. If you have a source to contribute, first contribute some facts that you learned from that source, then cite the source. Do not simply direct readers to another site for the useful facts; add useful facts to the article, then cite the site where you found them. You are here to improve Wikipedia—not just to funnel readers off Wikipedia and onto some other site, right? (If not, see No. 1 above.)
3. The References section is for references. A reference directs the reader to a work that the writer(s) referred to while writing the article. The References section of a Wikipedia article is not just a list of related works; it is specifically the list of works used as sources. Therefore, it can never be correct to add a link or reference to References sections if nobody editing the text of the article has actually referred to it.
4. Do not make a new article for your own product or web site. Most often, when a person creates a new article describing his or her own work, it is because the work is not yet well-known enough to have attracted anyone else's attention, much less independent and reliable sources against which the content can be verified. Articles of this sort are usually deleted. Wikipedia does indeed have articles about popular products and web sites, but it is not acceptable to use Wikipedia to popularize them.
5. If your product is truly relevant to an article, others will agree—try the talk page. We usually recommend that editors be bold in adding directly to articles. But if the above advice makes you concerned that others will regard your contribution as spam, you can find out without taking that risk: describe your work on the article's talk page, asking other editors if it is relevant.
6. Do not add an external link to your signature. However, external links to Wikimedia projects are exempt from this rule. For example, Wikimedia Meta-Wiki. (Although Interwiki links are preferable to external links for that purpose.

Accept reason:

You've demonstrated fairly well that you understand our spam guidelines, I'm unblocking you in the hopes that you follow what you've pledged. If you don't, it's unlikely that you'll be trusted in the future and your next block will probably stick for good. -- Atama頭 22:39, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

June 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Amber Valletta with this edit 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Bentogoa (talk) 17:48, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Ambrose Olsen with this edit. 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. Bentogoa (talk) 18:07, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Ana Mihajlović with this edit. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Bentogoa (talk) 18:31, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you harm Wikipedia, as you did at Andi Muise with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Bentogoa (talk) 18:36, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for Repeated Vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. FASTILY ^(TALK) 18:51, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Comment You should specifically pledge to refrain from adding nym.ag links, as we do not permit single purpose accounts with conflicts of interest to canvass Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 22:10, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Second chance was rejected - spam-only account - indef block reinstated

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest policy and notability guidelines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Ian Cairns (talk) 18:19, 21 June 2011 (UTC)