| Revision as of 07:10, 6 May 2007 edit87.64.93.128 (talk) →Workforall.net external link← Previous edit | Revision as of 07:17, 6 May 2007 edit undo87.64.93.128 (talk) →Workforall.net external linkNext edit → | ||
| Line 43: | Line 43: | ||
| :::Start by reading ], ] and ]. If you wish to add an external link, suggest it on the talk page of the article and wait if somebody else adds it. - The problem is that by now I am not able to add the link even here where I believe it could be perhaps legitimate. The spam-watchers would probably remove it immediately and without thinking because they see it as a part of your "valuable information" campaign. I fear that Misplaced Pages users have already decided. Cheers,--] 12:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC) | :::Start by reading ], ] and ]. If you wish to add an external link, suggest it on the talk page of the article and wait if somebody else adds it. - The problem is that by now I am not able to add the link even here where I believe it could be perhaps legitimate. The spam-watchers would probably remove it immediately and without thinking because they see it as a part of your "valuable information" campaign. I fear that Misplaced Pages users have already decided. Cheers,--] 12:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC) | ||
| ⚫ | The external link to the dataportal was reverted following the continued debate on on: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Requestion#Please_stop_indiscriminate_mass_destruction | ||
| ⚫ | |||
Revision as of 07:17, 6 May 2007
Workforall.net external link
Regarding the removal of this link:
It was commented as "rm workforall.net linkspam by User talk:81.242.58.154" but I do not see any discussion about the quality of the link on the user's discussion pages. It looks like the user spams all possible WP articles with the link but I do not see how it proves its low quality. Can you please enlight me? (I do not defend its quality because I do not know the site; but I would like to see a reason/proof.) :-) --Ioannes Pragensis 16:46, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Hello Ioannes. The workforall.net external link is part of a mass spamming with 112 linkspams so far. This spammer also copied and pasted large quantities of duplicate text into multiple articles which damages Misplaced Pages's content integrity. I've tried to clean it up as best I could but I could use your help. Please see User_talk:Requestion#workforall.net_linkspam for details. This link is going to be blacklisted by the official meta black list or by a bot so I wouldn't bother adding the link back. (Requestion 17:55, 30 April 2007 (UTC))
- OK, thank you, let us seek another link. --Ioannes Pragensis 18:50, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Here is the diff for this article. Note that this exact text has been pasted into 12 other articles. It was fairly recent so this propagation isn't bad but some other workforall.net paste spams have been in many Misplaced Pages articles since Summer 2006. (Requestion 19:44, 30 April 2007 (UTC))
- Yes, I have it seen in Regression analysis first and removed it immediately, because it is not appropriate there. But I think that something like this is useful here in the article about Economic data - I sometimes look for data about inflation rates, unemployment etc., and such external links can be very helpful if well selected.--Ioannes Pragensis 20:00, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
- Do you have any idea why the workforall.net spammer is doing this? They seem like a legitimate organization. It's just crazy. (Requestion 21:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC))
- I have no idea. Perhaps they do not know how Misplaced Pages works and think that it is a free advertising service... --Ioannes Pragensis 21:22, 30 April 2007 (UTC)
Workforall is a leading think-tank in Brussels. Their contributions provide information on a great number of socio-economic subjects, some of which have indeed political sensitive implications conflicting with mainstream economic thought. The information they provide is high quality, well researched and well documented, and their posts were a positive contribution to Misplaced Pages's quality and pluralism.
One or two of their posts would indeed better suite under a different subject. However the indiscriminate mass destruction for this sole reason of all the valuable information they provided has destroyed lots of highly valuable subjects.
Such hasty random destruction without thorough investigation is causing much collateral damage and looks more like vandalism than it helps to fight spam. Such hit-or-miss random destruction in a couple of minutes has the ultimate effect of lowering the overall quality of Misplaced Pages.
The last thing the Misplaced Pages community needs is censureship. Misplaced Pages does not need censors from big media to validate the quality of information. The visitors of Misplaced Pages are competent enough to evaluate the quality of information provided. Once big media censors take over it will be the end of the unique Misplaced Pages concept.
- In Misplaced Pages you must keep Misplaced Pages rules. The only thing you achieve with this behavior is that the Workforall site will be globally blocked, i.e. nobody will be able to add here a link to it in the future, even in a legitimate context. People are very sensitive to spam here, and you can easily imagine why.--Ioannes Pragensis 12:07, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
- Please tell me what concrete rule was not respected here. Valuable information was added here and a couple of related subjects to provide a link to the most comprehensive data source on the internet. By vandalising the post you are witholding the Misplaced Pages community easy access to worldwide data sources. Please tell me what contributed more to the Misplaced Pages' quality: providing the link or destroying it ? Please stop your the mass destruction of valuable information under the pretext of spam. Let Misplaced Pages readers decide for themselves decide what is valuable information and what is not.
- Start by reading WP:LINKS, WP:COI and WP:SPAM. If you wish to add an external link, suggest it on the talk page of the article and wait if somebody else adds it. - The problem is that by now I am not able to add the link even here where I believe it could be perhaps legitimate. The spam-watchers would probably remove it immediately and without thinking because they see it as a part of your "valuable information" campaign. I fear that Misplaced Pages users have already decided. Cheers,--Ioannes Pragensis 12:44, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
The external link to the dataportal was reverted following the continued debate on on: http://en.wikipedia.org/User_talk:Requestion#Please_stop_indiscriminate_mass_destruction