User talk:Deli nk/Archive 1

Archive 1

All About Houseboats link on the Wiki Houseboat page.

Hello, thank you for taking the time to reply.

Now my question is, I don't understand WHY you removed the External Link relating to All About Houseboats.

I am the editor & founder of the website since its creation in 2006, and it is TOTALLY related to everything on houseboats. There is over 1/2 million visitors a year, and has over 15k+ subscribers.

The link was on the Wiki page for probably 8 years, so I don't understand why it is now removed?

Would you be kind as to please EXPLAIN precisely why it is now removed.

Many Thanks, Ian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Imorton1800 (talk • contribs) 18:19, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

I see that essentially all your edits to Wikipedia involve adding all-about-houseboats.com to houseboat. The fact that you have had to repeatedly re-add the link back in suggests that it hasn't been there consistently for those 8 years. Since you are the owner of the website, I would suggest that you have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. Basically, you shouldn't add links to your own website. You can use the article's talk page to suggest adding the link and then only do so if there is consensus among other editors to do so. Deli nk (talk) 19:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Search Engine Scraping

I'm the author of a site you changed a lot (links) as well as another site where you removed whitespaces between words and removed some links. Both pages become useless, I guess you have a reason for the edits but in one case the grammar becomes wrong (various words melted together without spaces) and in another the content of the website becomes useless. Could you please let me know what the exact problem is ? Also I've done nothing different than in many other wikipedia pages with links, I'm not sure what the problem is in linking various open source projects? It's done everywhere in IT pages of wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by AllNicksBusy (talk • contribs) 19:29, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Several issues I see here. First of all, please don't call my edits vandalism as you did here. Wikipedia is a collaborative effort and any edits that are made by one editor can be changed by another. It is quite an exaggeration to say that those pages became useless because of the minor changes that I made to them. In addition to fixing some wikilinks, I removed links to external sites that were embedded in the text of the article. Wikipedia policy generally does not permit such links (please see WP:EL for detials). If you see such links in other articles, they should probably be removed from there as well. If you see a minor typo such as the space that I omitted, you can simply fix that minor error rather than reverting constructive edits as well. Deli nk (talk) 19:37, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Alcohol Justice Criticism Section

I understand the article has been in the past targeted by vandals. However, the criticism section you keep removing from this article is a legitimate section, not to be confused with the vandalism which has occurred in the past. Therefore, do not remove the section again.2600:1002:B126:7E66:69DB:97F1:1334:6967 (talk) 23:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1002:B120:D9C9:14BE:251D:F2C3:190D (talk)

The currect activity at the article is clearly related to what occurred in the past. Deli nk (talk) 15:29, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Parentheses

Regarding this, I suspect that those parentheses are explained by this: Triple parentheses. I will ask for the edit that added them to be supressed. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:21, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Huh. Strange thing to do on an article about a plant. Removing that edit from the article's history seems appropriate then. Deli nk (talk) 14:34, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

FYI

Re: [1]:Talk:Guerrilla_News_Network#Notability. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 06:18, 17 April 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2016 Cure Award

In 2016 you were one of the top ~200 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 18:08, 3 May 2017 (UTC)

Regarding removal of dead

I have replaced the dead link here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guerrilla_marketing. Please guide me why it has been removed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartline84 (talk • contribs) 11:13, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

Using multiple accounts (including Mirsambharram (talk · contribs) and Zubaidajunza (talk · contribs)) to repeatedly add the same external link to different Wikipedia articles, especially a low quality website such as seo-is-war.com, is considered spamming. If you persist, you may be blocked from editing. Deli nk (talk) 12:36, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The accounts mentioned by you do not belong to me in any way. I think there is some confusion. If you see my account its many many years old and have made only 4-5 contributions. I am from India, you can track the login IPs to see actually the above accounts belong me or not. Moreover why would I risk my old account. If I had to do repeatedly external links, I would have done from new and different accounts. There is total confusion somewhere. Please have a look at it again. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Smartline84 (talk • contribs) 04:32, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

Maybe it is just coincidence that there are several other accounts whose only edits involve adding links to the same website as you. But in any case, the website is inappropriate for use as an external link or reference on Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 12:03, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

strange edit

Hello,

Could you explain the purpose of this edit of yours, which I find very strange: [2] ? — Gamall Wednesday Ida (t · c) 17:39, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

It's a way of tracking spammers. It's common for spammers to use multiple accounts and IP addresses to spam Wikipedia with external links. When an editor removes a spam link, it is difficult to know if that link was added as a one-time thing or if it was part of a larger or more persistent spamming effort. Adding a "tracking" link to the spammers' talk pages, like I did in the edit you saw, allows all accounts and IPs spamming a certain link to be identified using Special:Linksearch. The tracking link is written in a way that doesn't direct to any viable webpage (so doesn't benefit the spammer), but still allows the Linksearch function to find it. This process is commonly used by Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam. If the Linksearch function finds many examples of the spamming link, the link can be reported to MediaWiki talk:Spam-blacklist for blacklisting, which effectively prevents the link from being spammed any further. Deli nk (talk) 18:02, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

That makes a lot of sense, thank you for the explanation. This is the kind of thing that would benefit from having a template, with links to such an explanation. Just dropping the raw link nowhere in particular looks like random spam to the uninitiated. Absent a template, I'd suggest instead putting it as an answer to the uw-spam or uw-advert warning and signing. Wikipedia:WikiProject Spam proposes to put it in the title. That might take a bit more time though, adding up to a lot after a while... Whether or not you choose to do so, thanks for the tedious antivandalism work that you do. Cheers. — Gamall Wednesday Ida (t · c) 18:30, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

I like the idea of having it as part of the standard uw-spam warning templates. Maybe I'll think about the best way to do it and a make that proposal. Deli nk (talk) 20:41, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Yes, I though of proposing to add an optional parameter to the templates -- that would be very nice, but in the case of your edit above, it wouldn't have helped, since such templates are substituted. Another, parallel idea would be to use a bot to do, systematically, what you have done manually for this IP, searching for spam additions that have been reverted / templated IPs / new users, and adding the tracking link if that's not already done. Given how tedious doing that is, that's probably the way to go long term. Another other idea would be to put that into Twinkle: when reverting vandalism and opening the user's talk page, store not only the name of the page on which the rollback occurred, but also extract urls from the reverted contents. If the warning is uw-spam or advert, pass this to the template (provided they are extended the way you propose). Unfortunately I can't volunteer to implement either idea, due to general busyness and rusty programming skills. Cheers — Gamall Wednesday Ida (t · c) 21:50, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

VPN blocking

Hi,

I have no idea how this editing/commenting normally works. You undid adding Wikipedia as a service that blocks VPN's from editing Wiki pages saying it needs a cite to a policy page. Here it is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Open_or_anonymous_proxies I can see both sides of this. On one hand there are VPN concerns. On the other VPN's allow people from countries or companies to add material that might otherwise get them into trouble (which is blockers are used by countries like China, Iran, and Syria). In any event - no matter what one's view - Wikipedia is definitely using VPN Blocking which is what the page is about. Here is a link to the page where you rolled back the edits: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VPN_blocking — Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.221.86.206 (talk) 12:44, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

The page you link to says "open or anonymous proxies may be blocked on sight", which is different than what you wrote: "Wikipedia blocks editing when using VPNs". Also the claims about the blocks being made by a user named "Defender" are not general - blocks on different IP addresses will be made by different administrators. And your claim that "Defender" is not a real person are incorrect. Please see w:meta:User:Defender who is a Wikimedia steward. Deli nk (talk) 13:33, 9 June 2017 (UTC)

Vic Elmes

What have I to do to make you understand that Vic Elmes is dead? I was a friend of him, I played with him. He died of cancer 20 April. Stop please removing this news because is a true news and for me is painful to add it everytime. if you don't believe just look this home page of his producer Garrelt Danker: www.garyland.de V.E. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vic elmes (talk • contribs) 07:23, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you are dealing with the death of a friend. Unfortunately, it is not all that uncommon for people to make false claims on Wikipedia that someone has died. Thus, Wikipedia requires some type of reliable source (maybe a news article or obituary) to verify that fact. Deli nk (talk) 14:06, 20 June 2017 (UTC)

No Spamming

Hi Deli,

I saw you flagging changes I made (dead link change) as SPAM (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spoofed_URL&action=history). To tell you honestly it was not spam effort. I may have tried multiple times for same change but that was because it was for the first time so I was not really sure about the right mechanism to change that dead link. If you can change that dead link to the active one then it would be good.

Thanks.--Kiran247 (talk) 09:29, 29 June 2017 (UTC)

In general, there is no need to replace dead links in references with different links. The existing reference is the source of the cited information, so just switching to a different website isn't necessarily appropriate. Most of the time a dead link can be fixed or an archived version of the website can be used. The reference you added, a blog, is typically not the kind of website to be used as a refernce anyway (please see WP:RS). Also, you may want to have a look at some of Wikipedia's related guidelines including WP:EL and WP:COI, which may apply here. Deli nk (talk) 22:34, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Vector Marketing

Hi I am new to learning Wikipedia and how to properly make contributions. I would like to make major contributions to Vector Marketing's Wikipedia page. How do I go about making this contribution but most importantly how can I protect this contribution from being changed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 97.79.217.35 (talk • contribs)

If you are new to Wikipedia, you may find this page helpful: Help:Getting started. Contributions that you make to Wikipedia cannot be protected from being changed. With any contribution you make, you should understand that others may change or even remove that contribution - that's just the nature of Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 22:36, 5 July 2017 (UTC)

Request on 18:02:19, 18 August 2017 for assistance on AfC submission by Sanjeewa Malaviarachchi

• Sanjeewa Malaviarachchi (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Geological Society of Sri Lanka (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Sanjeewa Malaviarachchi (talk) 18:02, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding the references, I have added notable references. However, i is still not accepted. Please see the similar page of Geological Society of India, which is already accepted without significant or notable references. One of its references are just a self reference of a person. Then how could it be notable? I think I need a fair decision. Please see my page carefully and compare it with that of the Geological Society of India. I need robust answer, and please do not swing.

Thanks for the comments.

At this point, I still think the article lacks sufficient references independent of the Society that support its notability as an organization. For example, are there any new articles written about the Society? I'll let someone else have a look and review the submission. Deli nk (talk) 19:39, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding Post editing

Hi,

I have edit the post regarding the weight loss to add up more appropriate information as the article and site which i link to that was good written and providing the relevant and solid information. Will you please re-review my edit as there was no spam in the content page which i linked, further you also mention the Wikipedia guideline page, and i have already read it and following there terms and conditions. If you could explain further regarding this edit i will be thankful, as i just wanted to be an active part of Wikipedia.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indoorwar (talk • contribs) 19:58, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

healthandfashion.us is simply not an appropriate reference for Wikipedia content, particularly for medical content. Please see WP:RS and WP:MEDRS for details. Deli nk (talk) 20:54, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

18:21:00, 2 August 2017 review of submission by Masterchefs

• Masterchefs (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:Master Chef Edward G Leonard, CMC (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

My apologies and hope the edit version works and I was mindful of the feedback. Masterchefs (talk) 18:21, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

About becoming an administrator

Wikipedia needs you! Take the poll.

Thank you for your all contributions to Wikipedia so far; they are very much appreciated. Your experience and tenure have been an asset to the project.

Have you ever thought of becoming an administrator? It can be enjoyable, challenging, and a great way to help Wikipedia.

If you would like to find out about your chances of a successful RfA, please visit:

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Optional RfA candidate poll

If you have already taken the poll recently, please disregard this notice.

Thank you!

Anna Frodesiak (talk) 07:55, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll give it some thought. Deli nk (talk) 12:12, 10 April 2017 (UTC)

Reversion of vegetarianism edit

I noticed that you reverted my edit. I also noticed that you are a senior user so I'm disappointed that you didn't follow a revert norm, from Help:Reverting: "in the edit summary or on the talk page, succinctly explain why the change you are reverting was a bad idea or why reverting it is a better idea". I think it would be a good idea to follow this because not only you explain the reason why you undid someone else's work but also may educate someone in being a better editor if your reason is a sensible one. Thinker78 (talk) 04:35, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

I did exactly what you say I should have done. In my edit summary for that edit, I succinctly explained the changes I made. I removed non-functional wikilinks from the article. Deli nk (talk) 10:39, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

You only stated what you did, you didn't succinctly explained why the change you reverted was a bad idea or why reverting was a better idea. In fact, you offered no explanation at all. Thinker78 (talk) 22:35, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

I'm having a hard time understanding what information you are looking for. Non-functional links are bad simply because they do not link to anything. Deli nk (talk) 00:26, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

You could have fixed the links but you chose instead to delete that section. So you should have explained then why it was better to delete the links than keeping the links and fixing them. Thinker78 (talk) 04:44, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Herbstman Collection

Thank you for taking the time to write me a message regarding my posts on financial history. As a historian on the subject matter, I would like to reassure you that I have taken your comments seriously. I appreciate it. JHerbstman — Preceding unsigned comment added by JHerbstman (talk • contribs) 17:26, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Luke Shen-Tien Chi

Unfortunately, I believe your rejection was a mistake. Please carefully look into all the news coverage in China. To make your final decision. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike7682 (talk • contribs) 23:54, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

No, it wasn't a mistake. I don't think the subject of the draft meets Wikipedia's guidelines for inclusion. Also, it seems clear to me that you merely are trying to promote yourself and your work on Wikipedia. Please see Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy for guidance - basically, it says not to edit Wikipedia in your own interests. Deli nk (talk) 09:55, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

So basically the guy is a big waste of time. I thought I really got something on him. But Im also a bit confused. Why wiki have approval so many other people without much information about them. And the hand disapproval so many who should have been approval? Can you explain to me what's going here. How about this. Let me delete him for you. So I will feel much better that he never exist! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike7682 (talk • contribs) 13:29, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Why would you think the guy is a big waste of time? How could you think that? If you are interested in learning why Wikipedia has articles about some individuals, but not others, please have a look at Wikipedia's guidelines for biographies, WP:BIO, or more broadly the general notability guideline. Deli nk (talk) 13:32, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

I read it! But Im not going to write that dude again. I found this guy should have a page approval. Here's why: first he got a major book deal. Which is now published. Anyone knows that if a guy got a major record deal. Would get a page on wiki. Second he got news coverage from interviews and have written one article on a major news channel. Also his created words that is in the dictionary. Now do you know anyone close has his words in the dictionary? Come on, I must be crazy get into this mess. Dont you agree now? Now I dont think. I need to go in to his family. So I got an idea. Lets get him on wiki group project. And let them fix the page. =) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mike7682 (talk • contribs) 14:32, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

Ekaterina Gorokhova

Hello! This article is about public person - russian top manager and labor market expert. All the information is taken from open sources: russian mass media, official website of Kelly Services, Inc. in Russia and other websites. If any corrections of style and content are required, I am ready to add them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ladushka008 (talk • contribs) 08:10, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Can you please tell me what is your connection to Kelly Services or Gorokhova? Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 12:20, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks!

Hi Deli, thank you for your comments at my RfA. Your support is much appreciated! ansh666 20:21, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

PetsForever

Hi,

Thanks for proving feedback. I am very new to Wikipedia changes so just want to understand what I did wrong so that I do not repeat my mistake in future PetsForever link- that I added was actually where they are talking about Pet loss and there is a great blog that actually helps to cope with pet loss.

Regards,

In general, blog posts are not considered reliable sources for Wikipedia content. Lots of details can be found at WP:RS. Deli nk (talk) 11:14, 26 September 2017 (UTC)

15:23:39, 27 September 2017 review of submission by Riverruby120

• Riverruby120 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:FoodFutureCo (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

Just wondering which references you are referring to! Would love to make the appropriate edits.

In the version that I reviewed, there were five different references. The foodnavigator-usa.com and agfundernews.com references I would consider niche publications. The forbes.com reference is just a personal blog (the lack of reliability of Forbes blogs for Wikipedia's purposes is discussed here, for example). The fooddive.com reference is a press release from the company and the last is a YouTube video. I don't think these amount to significant coverage in reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject as is required for inclusion in Wikipedia. Deli nk (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Special K page :)

Hi Deli nk, thanks for your feedback - I'm new to Wikipedia and am learning to update pages that are out of date :) I'm not trying to promote brands at all. Please can you guide me on how to be more successful and less promotional? Thanks :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MLB1KG (talk • contribs) 13:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Can you tell me, are you an employee of Kellogg's or otherwise being paid to write about Special K? Deli nk (talk) 13:19, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm going to take a wild guess you live somewhere that doesn't tell a lot of this stuff, Deli nk. Special K is a household name in Britain and most people here have heard of it. It's perfectly believable to be a fan without having anything to do with Kellogg's. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:39, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ritchie333: I agree that it's perfectly believable to be a fan without having anything to do with Kellogg's, but there are some blatantly promotional edits in the article's history that look like they were written by a PR professional. A simple fan would never write anything like, "Special K is a Kellogg Company food brand creating foods like breakfast cereal, snacks and drinks and is dedicated to help every woman live life at full strength." Deli nk (talk) 14:43, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Oh, right. I can picture Marjorie Dawes saying that, while trying to flog cheap Tupperware at the local Women's Institute meeting. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 14:46, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Even being from the US, I know Special K well, but Marjorie Dawes is completely beyond me. Deli nk (talk) 14:50, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hey @Deli nk: and @Ritchie333:. I'm not an employee of Kellogg's or being paid to write about Special K - I just used the original text that's there and tried to add to that and make it better :) they talk about strong women in all of their ads and websites so I thought that was new info to add to this Wiki article? Sorry if this came across wrong! Just trying to make the world's encyclopaedia more accurate! as I haven't really heard Special K talk dieting for a while. MLB1KG (talk) 13:20, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

OK, I understand. It's just that one of Wikipedia's core principles is that content is written from a neutral point of view. See WP:NPOV for details. The content you added certainly sounded promotional in both tone and content to me (and it's not just me: someone else added very similar content as you did and those changes were also reverted as "blatantly promotional"). Deli nk (talk) 13:32, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Q

hi, who were you referring to? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.35.73.190 (talk) 14:07, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

I'm sorry, when I first saw the report you made at AIV, I thought you were insulting a user name Calvero. I quickly realized what was going on and reverted myself both at AIV and at your talk page. Sorry for my mistake. Deli nk (talk) 15:04, 9 October 2017 (UTC)

AIV report

So I decided to take another look at that user per your comment here and, after a nice, long sip of coffee, I'm inclined to agree with you. I didn't see the edit in which they were hawking crowdfunding platforms. Blaming it on the morning right now. ;) Thanks for the prod! Cheers, m.o.p 11:58, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. I really appreciate you taking a moment to have a second look. Deli nk (talk) 12:00, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Discounting, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Discount (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:21, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Deli nk. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

Immunocore

Hi, You have sent me a message regarding my affiliation to Immunocore. I am their Communications Manager and assumed it would be acceptable to update factual information. If I am not able to do this or have to state a disclaimer, please can you advise on where to do this - this is the first entry I have made to Wiki so am unsure as to best practice. Thanks Zoerobertsimmunocore

@Zoerobertsimmunocore: In general, Wikipedia strongly suggests not editing an article where you have a conflict of interest. Instead, it is recommended that you use the article's talk page to suggest changes to article content. Also, Wikipedia's terms of use require that you disclose any conflict of interest that involves being paid to edit Wikipedia. Details can be found at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Deli nk (talk) 13:58, 13 November 2017 (UTC)

So what should I now do to ensure the changes are accepted to the page? Thanks in advance.Zoerobertsimmunocore (talk) 08:53, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

When you edit Wikipedia there is never any way to ensure that changes are accepted. All edits should be made with the understanding that others may alter or even remove your changes. Deli nk (talk) 13:49, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

Rebar

I noticed your deletion of the section on specialty sizes of rebar with your note that it had the appearance of commercial advertisement. I have reworked the section to be generic but it remains necessary to provide references to several manufacturers as sources of the supplied information. I am an engineering professional and professor, and am not a representative of such products. I have included this information because these products are used everyday in the industry. Please let me know if you have any further issues. --Jtyler277 (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 20:22, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

@Jtyler277: Indeed, I seem to have misconstrued that portion of the text. The use of branding (such as "THREADBAR®") rather than common text ("Threadbar") is common among those trying to promote commercial products, so that's probably what triggered my impression. This use of branding should be avoided on Wikipedia (see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks for details). Please don't let little errors like mine discourage you from continuing to improve the article (and other Wikipedia articles after that, too. ☺ ) Deli nk (talk) 20:30, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

Your concern was valid, it helped improve the page. Thanks for the feedback. Jtyler277 (talk) 20:38, 29 November 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewing

Hello, Deli nk. As one of Wikipedia's most experienced editors, Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; currently Wikipedia needs experienced users at this task. (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. Thanks. — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 05:40, 26 December 2017 (UTC)

---

Hello, Deli nk!

I am not very experienced with using/editing Wikipedia, so I appreciate your help! I hope this is the correct place to ask for guidance regarding the edits!

You said I was disruptive and posting promotional edits.

I went back to look at what I posted, and removed the facebook "Like Us" directive. I understand that now, for next time. And thank you for helping me learn the editing rules!

I also corrected the neighborhood name to not include the word Association, as the entire neighborhood is the Lyell-Otis Neighborhood, whether or not people residing there choose to be a part of the specific association. Again, I didn't realize that when I posted/edited earlier.

I included reference links to articles and news channel coverage to substantiate my post's statements. I made an error at first by not including the "/" in the </ref> at the end of each one. I believe they are now corrected, as seen below:

article text

Lyell-Otis Historically, an Italian-American neighborhood, this area of the City of Rochester is now home to citizens from across the globe. There have recently been efforts to improve the quality of life in this neighborhood, as the area has opportunity for redevelopment and renewal. The Lyell-Otis neighborhood is located in the City of Rochester, NY in the Northwest Quadrant. Bordering the suburbs of Gates and Greece, the Lyell-Otis boundaries are: The Erie Canal (the City Line) on the West, Lyell Avenue on the South, Driving Park Boulevard on the North, and the old subway bed (long since filled-in, which previously was where the Erie Canal flowed!) on the East - almost to Dewey Avenue, but not quite. Some history of the Lyell-Otis area: http://lona-history.blogspot.com _______________________ References

I hope this is now correctly edited and posted. Please let me know if any other changes need to be made. I do not want to be removed from the platform. I want to post properly, and accurately.

Thank you for your assistance! 72.225.39.27 (talk) 18:08, 31 December 2017 (UTC) Pam Davis

Even after removing the blatantly promotional content, I still think it is inappropriate for the article. The article is about Rochester, New York and such excessive detail about one non-notable neighborhood association really isn't relevant in the context of an encylcopedia article about the city as a whole. Deli nk (talk) 22:03, 31 December 2017 (UTC)

The modified text looks reasonable to me now. Deli nk (talk) 14:59, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Scot McGloughan Edits

Hi,

You're incorrect about the edits I made on the Scott McGloughan article. They were not vandalism- both details are true and in one case contradicts the currently outdated information in the first paragraph. He is not a football executive- he is a former football executive. He has not been employed by any team since being fired last year. The fact that he was fired from each team he worked for because of alcoholism is also true, relevant to the first paragraph, and easily verifiable- I can provide sources, though a quick Google search should show you there are plenty. Did you do any research before reverting my edits? Please change them back. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.129.192.90 (talk) 20:55, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) It's not required for reverters to do research. Additions that are potentially controversial should include citations for claims, especially on articles about living persons. -- intgr [talk] 22:09, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Please have a look at WP:BLP. Adding negative unsourced information to a biography of a living person as you did simply isn't permitted. Deli nk (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

03:14:53, 5 February 2018 review of submission by 47.18.32.216

• 47.18.32.216 (talk · contribs)
  • Draft:AMB Records (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs)

HEY IM SORRY I WASNT FINISHED EDITING THAT WIKI PAGE I AM NOT NEARLY FINISHED MY APPOLOGIES

47.18.32.216 (talk) 03:14, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

I evaluated the article because it was submitted to the AFC process. You are free to work on it further and the submit it again when you think the issues have been addressed. In particular, the page still needs to demonstrate that there is significant coverage in independent reliable sources in order to meet notability criteria outlined at WP:CORP. Deli nk (talk) 13:05, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Reason for reversal of edit in the PepsiCo page

The line in the origins of Pepsi cola doesn't mention the name of inventor. So I added it. The same name is present in other wiki pages and cited source. It's not like I added a random name nor is it a malicious edit. That paragraph doesn't have proper name and all subsequent lines contain only pronouns. So isn't it proper to add the name of the inventor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Drdebmath (talk • contribs) 14:09, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

@Drdebmath: Yes, you are right. My apologies. I have restored your edit. Deli nk (talk) 16:13, 9 February 2018 (UTC)

Re: February 2018

Hi Deli nk

Thank you for your message. I understand what you are saying. I was simply browsing the page and found a link that was dead (this one: http://www.ppi.co.uk/articles/banks-are-eagerly-awaiting-the-ppi-deadline ). I then replaced it with one that I thought was appropriate here: ( http://haveigotppiuk.com/ppi-claims-deadline/ ). Do you mind telling me why you think this new page wasn't appropriate?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ygiant (talk • contribs) 15:34, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

I think both websites aren't appropriate references or sources of information (see WP:RS for details). Based on your behavior here, which has involved little more than adding external links to Wikipedia, it certainly comes across as spamming. If you disagree with me about whether your website is appropriate to use, you can ask for others' opinions at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard and I'll go why whatever others conclude. Deli nk (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

OK. Then if both those are not appropriate references, what would you class as an appropriate reference for that section? Also, after just looking at the rest of the page, I am struggling to understand how neither of those websites are classed as appropriate, yet there is a link to credicards.com here: ( https://www.creditcards.com/balance-transfer/?aid=1201 - number 27 ) with, what seems to look like an affiliate modifier at the end ( the ?aid=1201 ). I would class this as spam wouldn't you?

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ygiant (talk • contribs) 16:04, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

For an article such as that, I would favor using non-commercial websites (government, reliable news sources, non-profits, consumer advocates, etc.) I haven't looked closely at all the websites used as references in the article. I agree with you that creditcards.com is problematic. I certainly wouldn't object to its removal. Feel free to remove ones that you feel violation WP:RS. Deli nk (talk) 18:28, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi Deli nk. I understand and appreciate your perspective on the matter. However, there are many commercial sites out there with good sources of data in their guides/posts etc and it would be unfair to not allow users to access this useful data/guides/posts just because of the commercial nature of the website. To take creditcards.com as an example, I agree that the comparison page has no place in wikipedia. However, this page: https://www.creditcards.com/credit-card-news/new-card-accounts-pre-recession-levels.php has some useful info in text and visual format. It also references its source (the american bankers association) regarding the data. It seems unfair that users would not be allowed access to this because of the commercial nature of creditcards.com. Also, some of the sites that you mentioned above are also in commerce as a by product/not directly but indirectly. News sites make money from ads as an indirect commercial result of their content (there is also the rise of the fake news epidemic, so credibility and reference of news can and has got affected). There was also the phone hacking scandal that involved news papers in the news too. I don't want to go on about it too much and I know wikipedia doesn't want direct promotional/sales stuff, which I 100% agree with. But when there is a useful resource on a commercial site, it seems quite discriminatory to not allow this to appear because of the nature of the website. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ygiant (talk • contribs) 13:31, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for the delayed response (I've haven't been on Wikipedia for a couple of weeks). Perhaps it would be helpful to get input from other editors. I would recommend leaving a post at Talk:Credit card suggesting using creditcards.com as a reference and see what others think. Deli nk (talk) 19:35, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Concern over paid editing on the Philipp Plein page

Hi Deli nk. Thank you for your concern over me possibly being a paid editor on one of the pages I've made changes to. I can assure you I'm not, however your concern has made me question the edits I've made and whether or not I've followed Wikipedia protocols to the best of my ability. If you have a moment, can you please advise as to what I've done wrong to give you that impression? I thought I was following the guidelines by documenting what changes I was going to make on the Talk page, giving any editors a chance to respond, etc. Once again thank you for your concern, as a new casual editor I'm learning as I go while trying to reference any help pages along the way and hope that other editors engage me on the pages I work on to help me correct any mistakes I make. JustAnotherNerdWithWords (talk) 18:12, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry that I miscontrued your intentions. However, the article is very promotional in its content (it has been marked with the {{advertisement}} template for several years). In addition, there have been many accounts, most of which are now blocked from editing, that have been confirmed to be sock puppets used to add promotional content to the article and have declared their connection to the subject of the article. Your edits seem to be similar in nature to theirs. Edits such as this and this simply look like a PR person building their client's resume. Deli nk (talk) 12:27, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Absolutely nothing to be sorry about. What you're doing is for the benefit of Wikipedia and as I said earlier I truly do appreciate the concern. The Plein page was a choice I made because I discovered the clothing line while shopping. Went online after, Googled and away I went. I was really hoping some other editors would engage me on the talk page because I had a lot of questions on how to properly add negative additions to a page without it coming off as vindictive. The first page I edited (That I may jump back into after this experience!) had a number of editors that have made it a fun challenge to add anything positive to the page and it taught me a lot. I was hoping for the same schooling on this one with negative updates but there was no activity, so I added what I felt comfortable with. With what you've pointed out, the documentation you've provided and going back over my posts, I can see what you are seeing 100% and I'm the one who should apologize. One of my nerdy sides is in the IT field and I should know better than to not do my reading first if I can't beta test it lol. Once again thank you for helping a newb figure things out on here. If I get the itch to edit again I'll take what you've pointed out into account to improve the edits I make. JustAnotherNerdWithWords (talk) 17:05, 20 February 2018 (UTC)

Astrology (Editing)

Hi Deli nk, I understand your anti-spam efforts and why you deleted Astrology Synastry chart link (there are many websites providing synastry chart, so I don't argue) ... but I don't really understand, why you deleted also links to Dodecatemoria and Ebertin's Cosmobiology. There are currently NO WEBSITES providing these astrology techniques online for free ... and it's pretty complicated to calculate these astrology techniques by hand. Is it ok for you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petr9 (talk • contribs) 21:56, 20 March 2018 (UTC)

It's hard for me to give you a specific answer because I don't know which article you are referring to - I haven't edited Astrology. But if I have removed an external link that you think should remain in the article, please use the article's talk page to start a discussion about it. If there is consensus among other editors that the link should be in the article, it can be restored. Deli nk (talk) 10:28, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I will try "talk page" to start a discussion about those two links. It was Dodecatemoria and Cosmobiology. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petr9 (talk • contribs) 14:42, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

East End Film Festival (Editing)

Hi,

I keep trying to update the content on this page. The text can't be deemed as promotional because it's factual. In fact, if you compare it other festivals like Sundance or LFF, they all follow the same premise. Again, these updates are made with the sole intention of adding essential information to the page. Promoting the festival is surely not one of them. 161.76.78.41 (talk) 16:15, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

The text I removed is highly promotional, full of subjective wording and PR speak. Even facts can be promotional. The fact that you cannot see your editing as biased and promotional is the reason that Wikipedia has conflict of interest guidelines. See WP:COI for details. Can you describe for me what your connection to the festival is? Deli nk (talk) 17:10, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

Peggy Weil (Editing)

Thank you. You are correct. Poor judgment to make corrections myself. Feel free to delete edits and revert to earlier unedited versions to maintain integrity. (At this point I don't feel I can make even that correction.) Pweilstudio (talk) 14:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)pweilstudio

OK. I notice that two other accounts User:Peggyweil and User:Weilpweil, which are presumably also you, have also edited the article and written much of its content. So just reverting the contributions from Pweilstudio doesn't really address the conflict of interest issues. I'm not sure what the best path forward would be. Deli nk (talk) 17:47, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

With regards to Draft of Prasanth Manghat

Hi Deli, this is with regards to the COI Tag placed on the draft page(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Prasanth_Manghat). I have responded to your message that you left on my talk page. This is a humble reminder to look into my reply. Would deeply appreciate your kind response in this matter. Grateful regards, Anurag Dev Kashyap (talk) 07:47, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

I have replied on your talk page. Deli nk (talk) 11:29, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi Deli, I have responded to the message you left on my talk page. Waiting to hear from you! Anurag Dev Kashyap (talk) 06:43, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I think it would be best if a third party reviewed the article instead. You can submit the draft through the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process and someone will take a look at it. Deli nk (talk) 16:46, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

April 2018

Hello, I'm Tahamedur09[[3]]. I want to let you know that external links I added to the smoothie [[4]], which was a reference for Bangladeshi [smoothie]. I added that link to external link instead of reference, cause I think that will be more appropriate and don't against our encyclopedia guidelines. 1 If you think that it can add it in Reference than let me know, I have no problem to add that reference link add on the reference. I wanna just tell the people how we Bangladeshi are making and drink the smoothie. One more thing, you remove another link which I didn't edit and existing there before mine editing. Tahamedur09 12.55PM, April 4, 2018. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tahamedur09 (talk • contribs) 06:57, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I don't think the source is acceptable either as an external link or as a reference. See WP:EL and WP:RS for additional information. Deli nk (talk) 16:55, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

I see you eliminated the previous changes again

as I mentioned to Valla, Ariba's work was already there. Then it disappeared. I no longer think that was me.

You have also reduced the full title of Malkin's work. I don't know how it works here but I think that is a mistake.

I also think even if you do not link you need to include the publisher again, as before, Harper Wave 2016.

But I have no stake in this and it appears other people do since my changes have been undone twice now. Not important to me but my guess is publishers are not happy when they are not included in a reference. — Preceding unsigned comment added by PickwickAD (talk • contribs) 12:50, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

I didn't intend to remove the subtitle of the Malkin book. My concern was the repeated use of external links in the Further Reading section. This is generally considered inappropriate. Deli nk (talk) 12:55, 10 April 2018 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Flag

Hi, Deli nk.
I've noticed that you are an AfC reviewer but don't yet have the New Page Reviewer flag. Can you please head over to PERM and request it?
As part of a larger plan to increase cooperation between New Page Patrol and Articles for creation, we are trying to get as many of the active AfC reviewers as possible under the NPR user flag (per this discussion). Unlike the AfC request list, the NPR flag carries no obligation to review new articles, so I'm not asking you to help out at New Page Patrol if you don't want to, just to request the flag.
Of course, if it is something you would be interested in, you can have a look at the NPP tutorial. Please mention that you are an active AfC reviewer in your application.
Cheers and thanks for helping out at AfC, — Insertcleverphrasehere ^{(or here)} 06:20, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

OK, I made the request. Deli nk (talk) 12:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

New page reviewer granted

Hello Deli nk. Your account has been added to the "New page reviewers" user group, allowing you to review new pages and mark them as patrolled, tag them for maintenance issues, or in some cases, tag them for deletion. The list of articles awaiting review is located at the New Pages Feed. New page reviewing is a vital function for policing the quality of the encylopedia; if you have not already done so, you must read the new tutorial at New Pages Review, the linked guides and essays, and fully understand the various deletion criteria. If you need more help or wish to discuss the process, please join or start a thread at page reviewer talk.

• URGENT: Please consider helping get the huge backlog down to a manageable number of pages as soon as possible.
• Be nice to new users - they are often not aware of doing anything wrong.
• You will frequently be asked by users to explain why their page is being deleted - be formal and polite in your approach to them too, even if they are not.
• Don't review a page if you are not sure what to do. Just leave it for another reviewer.
• Remember that quality is quintessential to good patrolling. Take your time to patrol each article, there is no rush. Use the message feature and offer basic advice.

The reviewer right does not change your status or how you can edit articles. If you no longer want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. In case of abuse or persistent inaccuracy of reviewing, the right can be revoked at any time by an administrator. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 13:21, 11 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

please help translate this message into your local language via meta

The 2017 Cure Award

In 2017 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 02:58, 26 April 2018 (UTC)

Phillip Plein page

Hey again Deli nk,

Wanted to see if I could get some assistance with the Philipp Plein page. Took a look at it for the first time in a while and noticed that there were edits made that make absolutely no sense what so ever. Random changes to words, words added that I can't find in a Google search, one that seems to be a username for a gamer, etc. I fixed some of those kinds of changes in the past on the page, but after you added me to that list of people that may be connected to the page, I'm not sure if I should be editing it anymore or what I should do. Could you please advise as to what the protocol for Wikipedia is? Very much appreciated and thank you for your time. JustAnotherNerdWithWords (talk) 14:13, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

The page was vandalized with nonsense on April 30. I have restored the last unvandalized version. You might want have a look at Wikipedia:Vandalism#How_to_respond_to_vandalism for future reference. Deli nk (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Hey I saw you revert the changes. As I said I've done it manually on the page before but it was during the time that I was making the other edits I did for the page. Back when we cleared things up after I saw you added me to that list of people who may be connected to the page I wasn't sure if I should remove myself from that list or not so I left it as is. When I saw the vandalism on the page, I just wasn't sure if me making any changes out of the blue again would do more harm than good so I figured I'd consult you. Once again your help is very much appreciated by this newbie Wiki-editor. Hope you have an incredible weekend! JustAnotherNerdWithWords (talk) 22:50, 4 May 2018 (UTC)

Magento Page

I added a link to the demo because you have to jump through hoops on the official website to see the demo and at the moment, they don't have any active demo pages. It's all done by 3rd party providers. Therefore I think it will be valuable to have a link to the demo on Wiki.

Thank you for this consideration. I am not affiliated with Nexcess or Magento. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webdesignexperts (talk • contribs) 22:53, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't think that site qualifies as a reliable source (see WP:RS for details) and therefore shouldn't be used in a Wikipedia article like that. If the website is your own, you should also have a look at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines. Deli nk (talk) 22:56, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Link to the website qualifies as a reliable resource. It's been hosted Magento software for many years. Again, I am not affiliated with them. Anyway, I'll leave it up to you. I am just starting with Wiki contributions. Not that long ago demos was posted to the official magento.com website, but it's no longer a case. Maybe it's Adobe influence or x.commerce. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Webdesignexperts (talk • contribs) 23:02, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Florida academy Page

Hello Deli, I created a page for Florida academy, which is a business/beauty school in Florida. I analyzed other pages on wikipedia and I created in a same way and a flow. I added only 2 external links, while others have more than that. Also, its a school and I read the rules for that before I published that page. Can you please look into that again?

Thanks, Rahul — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rahulbtrivedi (talk • contribs) 14:57, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

I don't know anything about the Florida academy page you are referring to. However, I have removed your repeated addition of links to hvactraining101.com because I think they represent WP:REFSPAM. Deli nk (talk) 18:47, 30 May 2018 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajpur,_Siwan

I Have made this page, This is my village: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rajpur,_Siwan), but You have removed all the links or data which is the proof that I have made this... Now how Can I tell anyone that I have created this page... and I don't have any authority as well. Please approve my links or provide me any authority which will be proof for me. In near future I will add or edit more pages if this authority will provide me.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chandan.kaushik (talk • contribs) 05:10, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

I removed a couple of external links that I thought were inappropriate and were not being used as references - they were just listed in the "External links" section. Also, I removed the paragraph about Anshu Dikshant, a non-notable individual that you have inappropriately trying to promote across multiple articles on Wikipedia. Please stop doing that or you may be blocked from editing. Deli nk (talk) 14:18, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Also, you appear to be using multiple accounts, including User:Anshudiksha. In general this is not permitted. Please see Wikipedia:Sock puppetry. Deli nk (talk) 14:52, 26 June 2018 (UTC)

Megan Thomas Page

Hello Deli nk,

The page Megan Thomas has not been paid for. I am simply creating a page about the famous model as there is none created about her yet and I am one of her greatest fans. Thank you. Prrelations (talk) 21:14, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

OK, that's fine. Your username suggested to me that this was a public relations effort. Deli nk (talk) 13:07, 28 June 2018 (UTC)

Redstone

Hi Deli,

Thanks for the note.

I do work for Redstone but there is no opinion in the short edit I made, just fact.

Sorry if that is out of bounds- what should I do now?

14:22, 23 July 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by RedstoneAP (talk • contribs)

In general, Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines suggest that you don't make any edits to articles about subjects that you have a conflict of interest regarding. Instead, you can use the article talk page, to suggest changes to the article and someone else can evaluate those suggestions. Deli nk (talk) 21:32, 23 July 2018 (UTC)

materialgrades.com

Hi Deli

Although the links are from one website but these were contributions. There is no need to undo all. Please consider. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waqasatb (talk • contribs) 12:05, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

If you can get consensus from others that it is ok to add that link to so many articles, then I have no objections to adding them back. Deli nk (talk) 12:08, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

Please ask others. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Waqasatb (talk • contribs) 12:11, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

If you would like to add the link to many articles, then the burden is on you to get consensus to do so first. Deli nk (talk) 12:13, 30 July 2018 (UTC)

I have posted my query here [[5]]. These aren't spam. There are adding value and depth to the Wikipedia articles, for instance:

[[6]] [[7]] Kindly refer to a technical person Waqasatb (talk) 07:56, 1 August 2018 (UTC)

Search engine optimization

Hey, I believe the content and the link add a lot of value to the SEO page. It is not a self promotion, although I would like people to know that I contributed it, I am fine with you adding just the content without the link. Thanks! Varunkeskar (talk) 21:46, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a how-to-guide. I don't think the text would be appropriate to add to the article and makeyourlists.com is not a reliable source for any Wikipedia content. Deli nk (talk) 23:54, 27 September 2018 (UTC)

COI question

Thank you, Deli nk. I do indeed. However, I am not acting on behalf of the company. This is just my personal contribution to Wikipedia. I only add citations - most if not all are from a history blog - to historical entries. I do not add or edit text entries precisely to avoid any conflict of interests.

Would appreciate your time and advice on how to best proceed going forward with this while being fully transparent about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markipedia 1 (talk • contribs) 12:05, 4 October 2018 (UTC)

Adding references to articles is a good thing, and the Washington Post is a reliable source, so I don't think there's really an issue with your editing itself. I think if you were just transparent about your affiliation, such as by noting it on your user page, that would be a good way of complying with the guidelines at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Deli nk (talk) 19:26, 5 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for your time and patience, Deli nk. Much appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Markipedia 1 (talk • contribs) 15:39, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Panda Security

Hi Deli nk

I am not being paid or financially recompensed by any company for my edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartySNGC2 (talk • contribs) 06:45, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

What is your connection to the company? It's clear since you have spent years only adding promotional content to Panda Security that there is some connection. Wikipedia guidelines say you should be transparent about it. Deli nk (talk) 11:43, 23 September 2018 (UTC)

Hisham Baeshen

Now I have put external links can you check please https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Hisham_Baeshen — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hisham Baeshen (talk • contribs) 11:25, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

Another editor has reviewed the article following your revisions and has declined it again for the same reason. I suggest that you have a look at Wikipedia:Autobiography, which you may find helpful. Deli nk (talk) 11:48, 8 October 2018 (UTC)

I'm new to editing wiki

Hi There, I tried adding some info I thought was relevant to the 'prune' page... as an external link I could put this info: checkiday.com/302bc93ea06b75a245dfe9db8c5cf54c/four-prunes-day

I'm confused what could be added as a reference to prunes externally when this is a website link referencing prunes. (I don't mean this to sound confrontational; not my intention! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Karrywacker1980 (talk • contribs) 14:34, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. I removed the external link you added to International No Diet Day because it wasn't directly related. But even if your external link mentions the topic, it isn't necessarily appropriate to add it (see Wikipedia's external link policy for details). Another editor removed your link twice from prune probably for this reason. Also, since all your edits to articles have involved nothing but adding links to one particular website, it seems that this is your purpose here and this could easily be considered spamming. Deli nk (talk) 14:54, 17 October 2018 (UTC)

vacation.rentals

You wrote that you deleted 2 of my submissions that I posted and I disagree completely. They are relevant to the article and are restricted to the body with citations from a major newspaper here in the United States. So yes, I think they should be reinstated.BransonBlitzburgh (talk) 00:56, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

I believe that your additions serve no purpose other than to promote the website vacation.rentals. The cited reference is merely a contributed article which is nothing more than a PR communication. Deli nk (talk) 17:48, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

COI advice

Hi Deli nk. You kindly dropped me a note about an edit I did to Image_server earlier today. In researching what Wikipedia had to say about Image Servers I found one link to an unmaintained solution (IIPimage) and one to a current commercial solition (LiquidPixels). There was no mention of two major solutions from Amplience and from Quru. Quite correctly, you spotted my ignorance of the COI issues and I have now read these carefully. Other pages, for example Web_browser even go so far as to list market share. With my conflict of interest (which I have to say wasn't intentionally hidden - check my username) what would you say the best way would be to get some examples of image servers added to this page? Qururoland

I would recommend using the article's talk page (Talk:Image server) to suggest changes to the article. You can use {{Request edit}}, following the instructions at that page, if you want. Deli nk (talk) 15:12, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Cocktail sausage listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect Cocktail sausage. Since you had some involvement with the Cocktail sausage redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion if you have not already done so. Polyamorph (talk) 10:35, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

ArbCom 2018 election voter message

Hello, Deli nk. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Reply to your talk message

Hi, I had added that link to tell people what is the recipe of that "dish". Intention was not to drop any link or do any spam. I felt it was relevant so added that link. Nothing else. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Spk100 (talk • contribs) 03:26, 22 November 2018 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 11

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Archbishop Curley High School, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page William Goodwin (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Facultative aerobic organism

On the redirect talk page you asked if there was any objection to moving the Facultative anaerobic organism article to Facultative aerobic organism. I do object. If you could please restore article to its previous title, we can discuss on the article talk page. Much appreciated. Eepavan has initiated a discussion on this issue. -- 06:58, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I don't mind if you want to move it back to the previous title. I originally moved it because the title and the text were inconsistent. Deli nk (talk) 12:31, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

Done. Trying to figure out if the project tags will still work, being as they are now on the redirect target page instead of the article talk page which is now a redirect. DIFU? -- Paleorthid (talk) 21:12, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

I think an administrator has to move the talk page . I have made a request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. Hopefully an admin will sort it out soon. Deli nk (talk) 21:41, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

That works. Thanks! -- Paleorthid (talk) 22:57, 20 January 2019 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	Thank you, ma'am, for your hard and enduring work on Wikipedia Mascer (talk) 00:19, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

correction of 404 not found link

So, I have edit that link because that link was not working so I thought maybe I can replace that link with the genuine one. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nimisha.saxena123 (talk • contribs)

If an external link in a reference isn't working, it can often be repaired or an archive of the linked page can often be found. It is not appropriate to replace the link with one to an unrelated promotional website as you did. Deli nk (talk) 18:03, 13 March 2019 (UTC)

Ok, we are sorry for our actions... it won't repeat again

we will avoid any of such. thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.117.124.105 (talk) 21:03, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

You Bar

Given the full article in the NYT, this would need a discussion at AfD. I am not certain what my own opinion would be.— Preceding unsigned comment added by DGG (talk • contribs)

Article [Food additive] improvement

Hi Deli, thank you for the comment after my writing on article Food additive.Would you mind to give more specific suggestion regards the missing content and how to improve my paragraph to more clear? Your kind response is very appreciated and await. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2402:7500:446:34A0:D46D:677D:6396:AE0F (talk) 03:09, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

First, can you let me know what is your relationship to the Asia-Pacific Anti Additive Association and the A.A. Taste Awards? Deli nk (talk) 13:31, 7 January 2019 (UTC)

Hello Deli

Deli I did add what type of problem did you have with my comment, just curious to know what is wrong with?I wanted to add to turkish influence. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cataina994 (talk • contribs) 21:31, 26 March 2019 (UTC)

Your additions were informal ("Sorry to my vegan, or vegetarian friends"), written in the first person ("we should explain"), unclear, ungrammatical in places, and entirely unreferenced. Therefore, I thought it wasn't an appropriate addition to the article. Deli nk (talk) 17:20, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Hello Deli

Thanks for your recent corrections.

While you might be right it also wrong to automatically mark my contribution wrong. A relevant page we created for our public figure and monitoring has been reverted by you which serve us useless.

Please, I took your warning into consideration but I totally didn't agree you reverting our page.

Keep calm and continue the good work. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 154.117.124.57 (talk) 00:05, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

I can't respond to this because I have no idea what article and what contribution you are referring to. Deli nk (talk) 17:21, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Benjamin (name)

We just "clashed" over this one - hopefully we have got it right now - there was a typo our dear friend corrected, as well as his "funny" stuff. Thanks for being there, anyway. -Soundofmusicals (talk) 20:49, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

It looks right to me now. Thanks. Deli nk (talk) 20:50, 11 April 2019 (UTC)

Removal of dead links

Hey, I am sad that replacing the dead link with original content, that the dead link used to point to is not acceptable. The article was restored with 100% original wording and no promotional materials were added. I added a similar link 2 weeks ago, that I re-wrote by hand from the original magazine and that was reviewed and accepted. If you believe that should be removed you can see it from my IP history. These articles would be gone forever and I kept the content promotions free, I understand that the website is not considered a real source and has promotional materials on other pages, but not on the dead link replacements. I really hope that you will re-consider or at-least take a second look. Have a great weekend. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 115.79.40.92 (talk) 20:46, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Spelling changes

Hello. In reply to the message you kindly left me regarding recent changes that I made (you didn't specify exactly what changes so I'm a little in the dark as to which specific changes you mean), you referred me to the Wikipedia MoS. I respectfully point out the following excerpts: "When either of two styles are [sic] acceptable it is inappropriate for a Wikipedia editor to change from one style to another unless there is some substantial reason for the change." - which I interpret as saying, if an acceptable (as defined in the MoS) style has been used, it should be retained. Much of the MoS describes what is acceptable. In the interests of universality and commonality (in my interpretation), this guideline is given: "Use universally accepted terms rather than those less widely distributed". This in combination with the previous excerpt gives very clear guidance that where an original style has used a less widely distributed term, it is justified and acceptable to correct that term to the more widely distributed term. If you would like to let me know exactly which edit has raised this concern for you, we can have a potentially more constructive and detailed discussion. Thanks. - TienShan0 (talk) 11:24, 20 March 2019 (UTC)TienShan0

The issue is that changing one language variation (such as American spelling) to another language variation (such as British spelling) can be problematic. The Wikipedia policy that I shared with you says that topics tied strongly to one region should use that region's spelling and if there isn't a strong connection to one region, the spelling already established in that article should be retained. Therefore, for example, when you changed the established spelling at drill bit from one language variation to another, and when you changed the spelling in masonite, an article about an American topic using American spelling, to use British spelling, then you are acting contrary to this policy. Other editors that have consistently violated this policy in the past, as you have been doing in most of your recent edits, have been blocked from editing. Deli nk (talk) 13:21, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Withania somnifera

Hi there, you recently removed an edit that I made to the ashwagandha page, in which I attempted to unbias study information from 'no evidence for any effect' to 'preliminary evidence, further studies needed'. As making a change like that has been discussed on the talk page through several contributors, I'm curious what's considered wrong with an edit like that? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beyvca (talk • contribs) 19:13, 17 April 2019 (UTC)

The changes you made to the article text were inconsistent with the references used to support that text. Deli nk (talk) 12:19, 22 April 2019 (UTC)

Bars and Melody page

Hi

Can I please tell you that the information on the Charlie Lenehan part was true information until you changed it back. I’m telling you he lives in Cologne Germany not South Gloucestershire if you don’t believe me look it up on their Twitter Babinacox19 (talk) 07:56, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

OK, I restored the location. But I think the dating relationships need to have a reliable source to be included. Deli nk (talk) 14:42, 7 May 2019 (UTC)

Hot Tub page

Hi. I got a message that you removed a change and link I left on this page. When I checked the page it was missing some parts from history which I researched and wrote about. I added this with a link to the post on the history of the hot tub. Looking at some of the other references, many were similar to my site (with less info) as well as some seeming to go to pages with potential sales material. So, I wanted to approach and challenge the removal of the info I added and link for reference as I believe it was quite relevant to the material on the page. Thanks in advance for going through this. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sean mccammon (talk • contribs) 10:24, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

In general, you should not be using your own writing as a reference for Wikipedia content. See WP:COI for additional details. I think a more authorative source is needed (what historical sources did you use for writing your website?) If there are other references in the article that you think are sales material or otherwise inappropriate, please feel free to remove them. Deli nk (talk) 22:07, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Lock and Keys page

Hi, I personally will not lose anything if this link is removed. But visitors will not be able to see how the keys from 2 to 17 centuries of our era really looked. These are real photos of keys made by professional photographers. But, at your choice) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berendei (talk • contribs) 22:04, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

That's what Wikimedia Commons is for. Please consider uploading the photos there if they have the appropriate license. Deli nk (talk) 22:06, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

Out of curiosity...

Have you ever considered making a run for adminship? We really need candidates who work in COI and anti-spam areas. Just thought I'd ask... GAB^gab 19:54, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for asking. Personally, I think I would be a fine level-headed administrator and I know I could contribute more effectively to Wikipedia if I were an admin. But I have no interest in subjecting myself to RFA. Deli nk (talk) 22:21, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

That's unfortunate, but entirely understandable. Please let me know if you might change your mind :) GAB^gab 23:38, 9 October 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for being one of Wikipedia's top medical contributors!

The 2018 Cure Award

In 2018 you were one of the top ~250 medical editors across any language of Wikipedia. Thank you from Wiki Project Med Foundation for helping bring free, complete, accurate, up-to-date health information to the public. We really appreciate you and the vital work you do! Wiki Project Med Foundation is a user group whose mission is to improve our health content. Consider joining here, there are no associated costs.

Thanks again :-) -- Doc James along with the rest of the team at Wiki Project Med Foundation 17:41, 28 January 2019 (UTC)

Finbar

You should change Finbar back — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8801:3300:1068:4C34:D759:C213:9634 (talk) 17:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Yes, that's what I've been doing. Deli nk (talk) 18:10, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Describing the qualifications of Stamets

Could you review and comment on this RfC, please? Many thanks. --Zefr (talk) 15:38, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

I have taken a look, but I don't really have an opinion one way or the other regarding that issue, so I'll leave it up to others. Deli nk (talk) 22:36, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

ideapractices.org

FYI: This page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individuals_with_Disabilities_Education_Act links to www.ideapractices.org - which redirects to a payday loan website. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.70.214.88 (talk) 23:46, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Good catch. I have removed the link. Deli nk (talk) 22:36, 4 September 2019 (UTC)

Helo

Why did you revert the article Jessicajohns89 (talk) 15:17, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

Reply me Jessicajohns89 (talk) 16:41, 16 September 2019 (UTC)

The website does not appear to me to be a reliable source by Wikipedia's guidelines: Wikipedia:Reliable sources. Deli nk (talk) 20:32, 18 September 2019 (UTC)

User:Arti Vitthal Shevate

Don't mean to offend by undoing a few of your undoings of that user's edits. What they wrote was indeed poor and uncited and should definitely have been removed as they stood. DMacks (talk) 16:15, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

DMacks, No need to worry about that. Thanks for taking the time to confirm and "rescue" some of that content. Deli nk (talk) 12:56, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

@DMacks: Pinging correctly. Deli nk (talk) 12:57, 23 September 2019 (UTC)