User talk:Alla tedesca

adoption
hi Alla,

Sure, are you looking for advice on anything in particular? It looks like you've made a lot of great edits already. The only thing I would mention is to be sure to cite your sources for any new information you add. Nice to have you around, let me know if I can answer any questions! best, -- phoebe / (talk to me) 03:50, 19 September 2008 (UTC)

Links
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. --Ronz (talk) 16:47, 1 November 2008 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Ronz (talk) 18:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

The following diffs of some of your edits appear to show a consistent pattern of spamming certain links while removing others from the same articles:              --Ronz (talk) 18:17, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
 * --Ronz (talk) 18:26, 10 November 2008 (UTC)

Advice
Hi - I read your post and I did talk with Ronz briefly. I did not look at all of your edits and therefor do not have a complete picture of the situation. I do not want to mediate, but based on the very few edits that I did look at, I can say this much: "Always leave an edit summary stating exactly what you have changed on the page. This is very important because we are so limited in our methods of communication." We only have this text-based style of chatting, so edit summaries are vital, in my opinion. E_dog95'  Hi ' 18:14, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Next steps
Yes, I think it would be best if we got a third party to help with the dispute. I'm leaving it up to you to choose a way from WP:DR.

To address your concerns, I think my comments about your behavior follow WP:TALK, WP:CIVIL, WP:AGF, and related policies and guidelines. I do not know what your complaints are. From what you've said so far, you may simply be upset over my examining your editing history and pointing out edits that I'm especially concerned about.

As to my expertise with network simulators, it's totally irrelevant from my perspective. I'm not relying on any technical knowledge of my own in this dispute, nor questioning yours in any way.

In case you missed my previous comment: "I suggest a WP:DR option involving other parties. To me this is a very straightforward case of the addition of inappropriate links.  I see no rationale why the links you want should be kept, nor any rationale for your removal of others." --Ronz (talk) 18:26, 11 November 2008 (UTC)