User talk:Bradjuhasz

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising in articles. For more information on this, see If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write   below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia. I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! &mdash;Tetracube (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Policy on neutral point of view
 * Guideline on spam
 * Guideline on external links
 * Guideline on conflict of interest
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

March 2009
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. Geronimo20 (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2009 (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. Geronimo20 (talk) 19:37, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Geronimo20 (talk) 19:38, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Linking summary:
 * http://eonfusion.myriax.com
 * http://www.echoview.com
 * http://www.echoview.com

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 04:13, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Case studies
What exactly are the four incoherent images offered in the link you submitted to the population dynamics of fisheries meant to illustrate?

Then there is that other time wasting thing you offer about rock lobsters. You placed that on quite a number of sites. It says it was an investigation to see if fishing activity altered the behaviour of rock lobster stocks. Hardly mind blowing stuff. But then it offers not a single result or conclusion. Just paeans to the virtues of your product. On yet other web sites you have just posted a link to your commercial web site.

Apart from anything else, the website you keep promoting seems to have been constructed by someone with atypical responses to colour and contrast. Not professional and very difficult to read. Your account seems to have been created for the sole purpose of promoting your product. Wikipedia is not the right place for this.

If you are as you say you are, "a company of scientists, researchers and programmers that have been exceedingly active in the marine research field for decades", then you seem to have remarkably sparse results for your efforts. I have left your list of links and the pdf on Elkhorn Slough to evaluate later when I have time. But so far, you are consuming other editors time without anything much in return to show for it. --Geronimo20 (talk) 08:34, 10 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Actually I'm giving you a lot of space to show you can add stuff that would be appropriate for Wikipedia. I'm have given you constructive criticism, and am not insulting you.


 * To recapitulate, why would the link you added to the population dynamics of fisheries be appropriate for an article like that? What exactly is it is about? Other people I have asked find it as difficult to read the screen as I do. Can you really read the caption at the bottom right? The images themselves are obscure, they have no descriptions, though a banner, which just gets in the way, is displayed across the middle of them. Perhaps all these problems are due to my platform – Mac OS X 10.4.11 using Firefox 3.06. Still, professional software should be easy to read and should render well across all mainstream platforms.


 * And then there is the link you say is about about rock lobsters. What does this tell us about rock lobsters? It's not about rock lobsters, it is about how marvellous your product is.


 * If you want to respond, please respond to the feedback, instead of getting indignant. If I'm missing something, then enlighten me. --Geronimo20 (talk) 03:39, 11 March 2009 (UTC)