User talk:Alhelib

Image copyright problem with Image:L_1b82d09dd062ab3e5a8950069fdf477a.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:L_1b82d09dd062ab3e5a8950069fdf477a.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 07:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Lady Sovereign
Your edit in Lady Sovereign has been reverted. I made those changes to reflect policies and guidelines. Please discuss any changes to the article before editing. Thank you. DiverseMentality (Boo!)  02:20, 14 October 2008 (UTC)


 * It's a Fansite, it goes on the External Links, many artists have it. It's not breaking any rule. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alhelib (talk • contribs) 02:31, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

I have to disagree with you. Per WP:ELNO, point number four, "Links mainly intended to promote a website." As a fan site is mainly linked to promote it, and offers no new information that the official site already doesn't. And to add, when you reverted my edit, you reverted everything I did. You could have simply re-added the external link. Also, please reply here as I like to keep discussions unfragmented. Thank you. DiverseMentality (Boo!)  02:39, 14 October 2008 (UTC)

---

“As a fan site is mainly linked to promote it” Thats a pretty weak argument, the purpose of external wiki links is to offer additional information that is contextually relevant. The other links serve the same purpose as the fansite, to provide information about the artisit that can not be posted on their wikipedia page. It doesn't matter if it is an established site or a new site, what matters is the information and reliability.

“and offers no new information that the official site already doesn't” That is a blatant lie, before so vehemently opposing something do some research into it, the fansite offers more content, news updates and many other things the official one does not. It is constantly updated to reflect what the artist is currently doing, the information comes from her personal profiles, the official website has no news or updates.

Furthermore the fansite doesnt make me or any affiliates money, it has no ads and cost me money to host it. Its only purpose is offer Lady Sovereign fans a hub of information in a clean and concise environment. You are not stopping spam you are stopping information, I have read the wiki rules on external links and it has a right to exist as a link with every other link.

Case in point...

Is it accessible to the reader? Yes.

Is it proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)? Yes, it is done solely to show support to the artist and only provides information that has been confirmed by multiple sources.

Is it a functional link, and likely to continue being a functional link? Yes, the hosting has been paid for 2 years in advance.

I always like to finish with a question so... Why do you delete the fansite so quickly yet you haven't deleted the promo site or the def jam page? They are both redundant links and should be removed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Duffman129 (talk • contribs) 01:34, 15 October 2008 (UTC)