| Revision as of 12:44, 3 February 2007 editNatl1 (talk | contribs)Rollbackers6,185 editsNo edit summary← Previous edit | Revision as of 19:45, 11 May 2007 edit undoCuruxz (talk | contribs)293 edits →VandalismNext edit → | ||
| Line 20: | Line 20: | ||
| This site will continue to be linked from[REDACTED] since its the only one that fully complys with the rules. The user steinsky has been reported to moderators for his actions. --] 17:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC) | This site will continue to be linked from[REDACTED] since its the only one that fully complys with the rules. The user steinsky has been reported to moderators for his actions. --] 17:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :: After taking a look at this website I can clearly see it deserves linking, and reading the arb request that was filed I can see no justifcation for its removal since they found no wrong doing by user Shaftesbury. I do wish people would go throug the proper channels instead of just deleting information off their own back. --] 19:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC) | |||
| ==External links== | ==External links== | ||
Revision as of 19:45, 11 May 2007
 | UK geography Unassessed  | |||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Vandalism
Recently there have been many attempts to remove links relating to Shaftesbury's web site ShaftesburyTown.co.uk this website is completely non-commercial and non-profit and free to all members of the town. It also is the only full online copy of the towns tourism guides, where to stay and where to eat, the chamber of commerces directory and the minutes and agendas of the council.
Please would commercial sites refrain from 'raping' wikipeida with spam links and if that is not enough then going on to damage long standing legitimate links calling them 'expired' or spam them selfs when they are clearly not.
Thanks --Shaftesbury 09:13, 7 January 2007 (UTC)
- This user has been spamming Dorset related articles for over a year with off-topic links to Shaftesburytown.co.uk. I will request the sites addition to the spam filter if it doesn't stop. Joe D (t) 17:21, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
Steinsky is being very pathetic, the dorset page has nothing to do with me (check history of that page!) and shaftesburytown.co.uk is and remains the only non-commerial website dedicated to shaftesbury and its area, as a responisble citizen of this town I will continue to support the work done by shaftesburytown.co.uk since the other 2 sites are either commericaly owned and wasting tax payers money that was given out with out due process or owned by a company that is still under investegation for not completing a contract(if there ever was one) to do a town website for the council.
This site will continue to be linked from[REDACTED] since its the only one that fully complys with the rules. The user steinsky has been reported to moderators for his actions. --Shaftesbury 17:54, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- After taking a look at this website I can clearly see it deserves linking, and reading the arb request that was filed I can see no justifcation for its removal since they found no wrong doing by user Shaftesbury. I do wish people would go throug the proper channels instead of just deleting information off their own back. --Curuxz 19:45, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
External links
Misplaced Pages:External_links provides a guideline for including and excluding external links in an article. If you wish to include or exclude external links in this article, please read Misplaced Pages:External_links and use the text from Misplaced Pages:External_links to support your position. If you have trouble with using the text from Misplaced Pages:External_links to support your position, please post a note on my talk page and I will gladly provide assistance. -- Jreferee 16:21, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
Association of Members' Advocates
Your case has been opened here, Misplaced Pages:Association of Members' Advocates/Requests/January 2007/Shaftesbury. Please see it for more details.--Natl1 (Talk Page) (Contribs) 12:44, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
Categories: