User talk:Vrphotographer

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added 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. TheMindsEye (talk)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from Wikipedia. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. TheMindsEye (talk) 18:25, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

External links

Hi, Vrphotographer, I have just re-reverted the external links you added to Panoramic photography. The reason I did this is because they do not appear to benefit the reader. I also note that you've added the book link to the articles Panoscan, Quicktime VR and VR Photography. Please refrain from adding links to promotional websites, as this is considered spamming and you may be reported and possibly blocked. You can add these links to Open Directory Project (DMOZ), which is already linked in the Panoramic photography article. Thanks, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 12:35, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

September 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to the page Panoramic photography 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. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 18:19, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Vrphotographer, the external links you keep adding to articles are not really helpful. As I've noted before, please look at WP:ELNO for guidance as to the type of links desired in Wiki articles. In particular, the link to the purchase page for this book that you seem to be promoting adds nothing to the articles, but seems to exist strictly as a commercial advertisement. If you believe that these links would improve the articles, I would suggest that you start a discussion on the Talk pages of the articles and allow other editors to weigh in on the decision. TheMindsEye (talk) 20:27, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Please stop

Vrphotographer, at least three people have reverted your external links. Please stop adding them; this is considered linkspamming and edit-warring. I will report you if you continue. Thanks, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 21:03, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi all.

I don't quite understand why you are willing to cite a resource or link, but not actually make that link active -- which you are repeatedly doing in this case.

It seems that you only want to promote citations and references of your own choosing, rather than those that are relevant and of interest to the entire community of panoramic and VR photographers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vrphotographer (talk • contribs) 06:07, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

No, we don't want to promote anything. That's exactly the issue: the link is spam for the book, not a neutral catalog listing for it or the actual book contents itself. Anyone interested in the book can follow the ISBN link, which is a neutral way of linking out to the book as available from many and various types of sources. {{Cite book}} is the canonical way to format book citations--even if not using it, it includes good information about the types of data that might be included. There is a "url" field, and it specifically says to use for the specific content and not for commercial link of any sort. DMacks (talk) 06:16, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Response

Hi all.

I don't quite understand why you are willing to cite a resource or link, but not actually make that link active -- which you are repeatedly doing in this case.

It seems that you only want to promote citations and references of your own choosing, rather than those that are relevant and of interest to the entire community of panoramic and VR photographers.

You also seem to feel it appropriate to provide a link to a panoramic photographer organization (IAPP) that has a grand total of about 50 members world wide, but repeatedly delete one or more links to other organizations such as the IVRPA, which has over 1,000 panoramic photographer members world wide. Again, you appear to be protecting your own interests, rather than serving those of the general public and community -- all of whom are entitled to learn as much as possible about panoramic and VR photography via Wikipedia articles and links.

Your actions in repeatedly deleting valuable links and claiming they are SPAM is helping no one -- except perhaps those whose own personal interests you are promoting.

Vrphotographer (talk)

The irony of course is that you are merely substituting your judgement about "relevant and of interest", and complaining about protecting our own interests while what I as an uninvolved party see is you here primarily here to promote your interests (group, book, whatever). Actually one of the worst reasons to add one piece of objectionable content is WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS...each item needs to stand or fall on its own merits. Maybe IAPP shouldn't be linked, but that's a separate issue from the link you are adding. This IVRPA thing sounds substantial, but its website is pretty dead (everything at http://ivrpa.org/ is a server error)...doesn't seem useful to link to it. But if it is a major organization, maybe it would be worth having a wikipedia page about it. That's a good standard used in similar contexts...if it's notable enough for an article, then can just link to that article and that's definitely appropriate. DMacks (talk) 06:32, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Vrphotographer, the only information I could find on Panoscan in the linked site is that the cameras have a built-in pan mechanism and do not require a third-party device. This, and specific information about Quicktime VR format which couldn't be included - paraphrased to avoid copyright problems - in text with a reference in cite web or cite book format.

Another concern about this link is that the content is presented entirely in images which take a while to download and exclude non-graphical browsers like Lynx, screen-reader software and those who read without images, from accessing content. I work without images most of the time, so I could not see the page's content, just the 'buy now' text link. I don't object entirely to the book link. I will deep link relevant content and convert the reference into cite-web format and a note that the content is in jpeg format.

BTW, please don't mark reverts as 'minor edits'; it makes editors think you're trying to hide something. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 20:12, 16 September 2010 (UTC)