Saschke69

October 2019

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Simple Network Management Protocol. 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] MrOllie (talk) 13:28, 21 October 2019 (UTC)

I've replied on this matter via e-mail. Just to highlight something: I see a lot of newspapers like Bleepingcomputer that are being mentioned via a direct link to their website on Wikipedia (which are blog articles mind you). But if we add a serious source to help people (in this case: give them alternatives to scan an SNMP server), it gets removed. Don't be so biased please.

Hello Saschke69. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Saschke69. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Saschke69|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. MrOllie (talk) 15:46, 22 October 2019 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bleeping_Computer

So they also should be told off for the links to their websites as their sources?

I'm not a paid advocate, I'm new to Wikipedia and I try to do my contribution to things that I have knowledge about and that is: automotive, IT, sports and engines. So let me do my thing (check it if you want) or otherwise, to say it in the words of Khabib Nurmagomedov, send me location! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saschke69 (talk • contribs)

Are you sure that's your answer? If so, your choice of username is an amazing coincidence. - MrOllie (talk) 12:10, 23 October 2019 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're saying but the etymology is: Special Air Service Chris "Harry Kane" Evans. Six Nine is a random number because, well, we all love a good 69 ;) Have you seen my adaptation to the RS3 page? Right now i'm writing about the problems a EA888 engine can have.