User talk:Eastsidetruman

In Defense of My Recent Edits

To Teapot, Hoary, and other editors...I have recently made some external links on the pages of several photographers to JGS (The Joy of Giving Something, Inc.) I have looked closely at the WP:EL guidelines, and frankly do not see that any of my edits have been disruptive. JGS is a not-for-profit organization. They do not sell any art. They are a major collection of photography, represented by over 10,000 works of art. The collection has been curated by exhibitors and academics from major art institutions around the world. For an artist to be included in the collection means that their work has been significant. All attempts to link photographic artists to the collection vis-a-vis Wikipedia is in an effort to contextualize the artists work. It has profound academic significance, as JGS is an encyclopedic collection which also publishes journals, books, and an online Museum (which is always free to the public). By any measure, there is no difference between linking to the JGS Collection or to MOMA, ICP, Getty, or any other museum in the world. But let me address some of the specific allegations. According to WP:EL "links normally to be avoided": 1. Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond the article. I would argue that this link does provide unique resources. 2. Any site that misleads, inaccurate, etc. Not applicable. 3. Malware, malicious scripts, trojan exploits, etc. Not applicable. 4. Links intended to promote a website. (Spamming.) I can see where some editors suspect this, however, there is no agenda on part of the organization to drive traffic. If anything, linking to JGS lends legitimacy and context to the work of these artists. 5. Links to pages to sell. (See number #4). 6.Links to pages that require payment or registration. Not applicable. 7. Inaccessible...n/a. 8. plugins n/a 9. search engines, aggregators, etc. n/a 10. Social networks n/a 11. blogs, personal web sites n/a 12. wikis n/a 13.Indirectly related to the article's subject - hardly. 14. Manufacturers, etc. n/a 15. Links to sites already linked through Wikipedia map sources, etc. n/a 16. non-functional or temporary link n/a 17. Affiliate or referral link n/a 18. Redirect, disambiguation, etc. n/a 19. Links to websites mentioned in the article. n/a 20. External links as entries in stand-alone lists. Entries should have non-redirect articles on Wikipedia. (This is perhaps significant, and I will further investigate to see if linking to JGS via Wikipedia entry is viable.)

So, on all but one count (the last) there is NO intention or evidence of spam linking or disruptive editing. HOWEVER, I will refrain from making any further links until I hear from one or more editors. And I thank you all for your time and effort to uphold wikipedia's integrity, such as it is.

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Ackroyd & Harvey 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 to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:11, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Thomas Annan. 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. Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:15, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

This is the only warning you are receiving regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you insert a spam link, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Spammers may have their websites blacklisted as well, preventing their websites from appearing on Wikipedia. Teapotgeorge^Talk 19:23, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

I'm surprised to see these new warnings about new edits by you. You had previously asked me here about adding links and I had replied to you; briefly, my reply had pointed you in the direction of "WP:EL". But the simpler version is, as Teapotgeorge has said: stop adding links to this website. -- Hoary (talk) 03:08, 25 March 2010 (UTC)