User talk:Benhood

You were reported, ad some of your edits rolled back, but a different user. That user reported to the the vandalism intervention noticeboard, which is equivalent to requesting a block. Since you hadn't been warned or communicated with at all, I decided to give you a last warning and see what happened. My apologies for not following up - it was a school day so I was dealing with a high amount of childish vandalism and the like.

As for the problem with the links themself, I can't say what the person who reported you thought was the problem, but I can give you some possibilities. One is that they feel this is excessively promotional. I notice that some episodes are available for free, but I couldn't determine if everything on the site was free. Granted, I didn't investigate in any great detail. Another possibility is that they feel this is an area where a link to rich media is not necessary, although in that case I think they should have brought it to the article talk page. Finally, they may have assumed that these videos were being hosted in violation of copyright, which would explain why you were reported to AIV immediately. Alas, I don't know because I can't remember who reported you and it's been several days, so the history of WP:AIV is not many pages long. I hope this explains what you want to know. If not, please feel free to ask me any other questions. Natalie 21:35, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Links to "free" videos are forbidden if they lead to a site with ads
Here's the relevant passage from Spam: ''Adding links to online free videos that promote a site or product is not allowed.... A video is a spamming video if: ...
 * It has links on the video page—the page that plays the video—that go to a commercial site or to another spamming video, even if it is only one link among many legitimate links....
 * It has text at this video page that would lead readers to a specific commercial site....'' -- Orange Mike 03:02, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

moving pages
If you move a page, like Rob Lord to Rob Lord (musician), it's your responsibility to fix all the links which pointed to it so they don't now point to a disambiguation page. Please do so! Thanks. PamD (talk) 14:39, 22 April 2009 (UTC)

Nomination of Rob Lord (software developer) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rob Lord (software developer) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Rob Lord (software developer) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.  Angry Harpy   talk 16:25, 7 June 2021 (UTC)