User talk:Fiatlux5762

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 The Beatles 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. Ward3001 (talk) 01:35, 23 October 2008 (UTC)

Bipolar disorder

Hi -- let me direct your attention to Talk:Bipolar disorder#Omega 3 fatty acids. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 20:07, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

BeatlesBible.com

Greetings,

Within the Beatles material on Wiki I count 137 backlinks to one website: http://BeatlesBible.com. After reviewing Wiki policies regarding external linking, it appears that these backlinks violate one or more of 3 Wiki guidelines: #4 links intended to promote a website, #5 links intended primarily to sell products or services, and #11 links to most fansites. For discussion purposes, I've enclosed a listing of the Wiki backlinks pointing to BeatlesBible.com below:

139 backlinks from 13 different .org domains.

aeternumls.org	1
alabamapublicrecordsearch.org	1
bg.wikipedia.org	1
dattolos.org	1
en.wikipedia.org	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 

64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105

en.wikiquote.org	1
es.wikipedia.org	1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22
fr.wikipedia.org	1 2
gilbertojr.ocorpo.org	1
id.wikipedia.org	1
it.wikipedia.org	1
ru.wikipedia.org	1
tr.wikipedia.org	1

Note: These include the English, Spanish, French, Italian, Russian, and Turkish versions of Wikipedia.

Fiatlux5762 (talk) 16:39, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Please note that a large number of those links are not subject to the EL guidelines you mentioned, per WP:ELPOINTS #1: "This guideline does not apply to inline citations or general references, which should appear in the 'References' or 'Notes' section." I've left in place any of your edits that removed the links from an External links section of an article; I've reverted any edit where the link was in an inline citation. If you want to make a case that BeatlesBible.com is not reliable, that's a separate issue from the external link guidelines. —C.Fred (talk) 18:54, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:42, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

137_Links_to_BeatlesBible.com

The query has been moved to Wikipedia_talk:External_links#137_Links_to_BeatlesBible.com. SilkTork *^YES! 16:54, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello. I don't think it is appropriate for you to be making mass edits to remove a website from Wikipedia while a discussion about it is currently in progress. Wait until the matter has been settled before you act on it. McLerristarr | Mclay1 07:59, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

That is my error and I do apologize. I thought the matter had been settled when I didn't hear back from anyone. I have halted making corrections. Fiatlux5762 18:50, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Does anyone have an further discussion points or should we proceed to remove the remaining links to the BeatlesBible.com fan site? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fiatlux5762 (talk • contribs)

See my comment above on the difference between external links to the site and uses of the site as a reference in an article. —C.Fred (talk) 18:57, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Fred see WP:REF (Citing Sources) "Embedded links to external websites should not be used as a form of inline citation, because they are highly susceptible to linkrot." Therefore, these links also need to be removed.

Quite the contrary: they should be expanded to include the name and title of the page. The link at, for example, I'm Happy Just to Dance with You is appropriate: it includes the name of the website, page title, and date of the retrieval as well as the link to the website, instead of the bare link alone. —C.Fred (talk) 20:03, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Tell you what. You work on that and I'll work on a press release. Cheers.

Glad you mentioned C.Fred this Happy Just To Dance With You reference because it will make it so clear to anyone not getting kickbacks from BeatlesBible.com what a total fiasco has been made of Beatles material on Wiki. The link goes to a page on BeatlesBible.com that hardly contains any information at all compared to that contained on http://www.beatlesebooks.com/happy-just-to-dance. Face it, your days of skimming money from BeatlesBible.com is coming to an end! You guys were way too sloppy putting links to BeatlesBible that says things like She Love You is the second record on the second album and giving credit to BeatlesBible for such astoundingly unique content! Like none of the 30 million people with copies of those albums would have any way of knowing that information had it not been for BeatlesBible.com lol!

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 21:29, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:37, 23 November 2015 (UTC)