User talk:Billinghurst/Archives/2014/February

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:25, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * EdwardsBot (talk) 11:56, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:59, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:10, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Turing machine
Hi, why do you delete the link i add in the article about turing machines? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Zicane (talk • contribs) 03:08, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Read External links. Wikipedia is not about just adding external links, but building the encyclopaedia. — billinghurst  sDrewth  10:31, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

What?
This is getting a little ridiculous, don't you think? It seems as though you've followed me around removing any edit I make. Please don't do that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.168.37 (talk) 03:45, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

You are going to need to be more specific than "read this".

You did NOT even visit the link. You removed a valid error correction. What you are doing is simply vandalism, disguised as some kind of service. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.168.37 (talk) 03:58, 23 February 2014 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your opinion. This is an encyclopaedia, not a collection of links to information of an uncited nature, without any evidence of the nature of the source of the material. Please see External links and Citing sources. While you are at it, it is probably worth looking at Conflict of interest as your additions all relate to the same site. — billinghurst  sDrewth  04:23, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

I don't know where to post this (I am sorry, I am new to this), but your edits are completely baseless, for the following reasons: 1). You did not even visit the links that you claim are "not supported in the source material".     2). You reversed an edit that was a correction, and I stand by the correction. Maybe it's a topic that you don't understand? 3). you called one link a "commercial link", but you didn't visit that link to even verify that.  Yet, there were actual commercial links right above mine, left unedited.  So what is it that you are doing, besides harrassing one user who you seem to be following around with some kind of vengance.  Why?     This kind of thing makes people not want to contribute, and I for one am done.     But, I am contacting the office in SFO on monday to ask for my donation back (policy says 90 days) and I want to tell them why.   People like you are ruining a good thing.  But that's just one person's opinion.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.168.37 (talk) 04:35, 23 February 2014 (UTC)


 * If you think that other commercial links should be removed as irrelevant, then please feel welcome to remove them. I did visit the page of the links, though I did not explore the site. The pages that were linked did not demonstrate the basis or the scientific principles that were used for the calculations. There was no improvement of the article, no references. I was not following you around, I was following pattern of links to a site, which just happened to all be added by you where previously no other linking had been undertaken. We are looking to build an encyclopaedia, not a directory listing, and every link that is added needs to be justified, and have a strong reason to be there. Asking you to justify a series of links to a site and demonstrate that the links have value is not harassment. — billinghurst  sDrewth  10:40, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 February 2014

 * Read this Signpost in full
 * Single-page
 * Unsubscribe
 * MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:26, 28 February 2014 (UTC)