User talk:Endabusenow

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 my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Beloved freak  12:13, 11 July 2007 (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

Some answers...
Hi Endabusenow, I shall try to answer your questions as best I can!

Firstly, about the link. It was probably the clinical depression page that I deleted it from as that's on my watchlist. I'm not going to put it back on the page because I still don't think it should be there. I'm glad you've read the guidelines. The most relevant one here, I think, is WP:NOT, that wikipedia is not a collection of external links, or internet directory. I have looked at the website and I think it's great, looks like a very valuable resource for kids dealing with these issues. However, I do not think it is encyclopaedic, and wikipedia is, after all, an encyclopaedia. I still think that someone looking for help and support is more likely to search in google and find that website than to come to wikipedia to read through an article about say, depression, and then follow your link at the end. Anyway, that is my opinion. Yours is obviously different and I absolutely believe you are acting in good faith. If you want to add the link back to pages, then I think you should go ahead. I will not delete it, although you may find that other people do. One thing I would suggest is looking for other people's opinions, perhaps by discussing it on the article talkpages. I see you have already posted on the Psychological abuse talkpage. I hope you get a reply there soon. Another page to go would be Wikipedia talk:External links where there will be people hanging about who have a lot of experience with deciding what links are appropriate. Policies and guidelines can be quite complicated and as such open to interpretation. Therefore, I cannot say for sure that I am right, and you are wrong, only what I believe.

Now, about editors. Yes, editors all have the same rights to edit pages. There are other kinds of users like administrators. No one has official rights for certain articles. An administrator may protect a page if there is a lot of vandalism, or edit warring. It's not good for a page to be constantly reverting between two versions because the editors can't come to an agreement on how it shold be. This happens a lot, and often the differences of opinion are, to people not involved, very trivial. See Lamest edit wars for some examples. In my opinion, if that starts happening, it's probably best just to step back and go and edit something else. Of course that's hard to do if it's something you feel strongly about. But other than that, anyone can edit a page. Also, anyone can revert your edit or delete what you have written, even if you have not one against policy, just because they disagree with you. Nobody should remove your edit, if it's considered useful, verifiable, well-sourced etc. But that doesn't mean someone won't revert it. For all kinds of reasons, good and bad. They just might not like what you are saying. Some people feel that they own the page, and don't like people changing what they think of as "their work". Or they might think that what you've added violates some guideline or policy that you just haven't discovered yet. You could of course revert back, but be careful to avoid breaking the three revert rule which could get you blocked. The best thing to do is to always explain your edits using edit summaries so people know why you have made an edit - this also lessens the chances of people thinking you are a vandal. Also, if you are going to make changes that you think might be controversial, or someone has already reverted similar edits, it's probably best to discuss it on the article talkpage. Hope that all makes sense. I am by no means an expert on admins or policies, just picking it up as I go along just like you!

About going back to past versions of articles. I'm not sure exactly what you want to do, but if you go back to a past version and save it, or maybe make a few edits and save it, yes, everything added since that version will disappear. Like I say, not sure exactly what you're trying to retrieve, but I would suggest going back to a previous version, copy what you want, go to the current version, click edit, and paste the info in the article. Making sure of course that it's all seemless & formatted ok. Nothing is ever truly lost as it's all in the history.

Those square things are called userboxes. There is a project about userboxes here. There are lots of links to different ones you can use on your userpage at the bottom of that project page. There is more info on userpages here. The one you mentioned uses this template: Just copy and paste that on your userpage and it should work. I'm not sure if there's a child abuse one but you'll probably find one. Otherwise, looking at the project page you could either learn how to make one or possibly ask someone there to make one.

One final thing. If you are interested in sticking around wikipedia & contributing, you might consider being adopted. This just means having someone to go to to ask questions & advice on wiki stuff. If you do decide this is what you want, I have recently put my name down to be an adopter and would be happy to adopt you. Feel free to be adopted by someone else though, I wouldn't be offended! Or maybe you don't feel you need it, that's fine too. See the adoptees area for more info. It'd be much like what we're doing now, just formalised.

Anyway, wow. That was a lot of writing! I hope it all made some sort of sense. Best piece of advice is probably be bold. Don't be afraid to just start editing pages and adding stuff that's missing. Always best with references of course! -- Beloved freak  13:32, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

WP:EL
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. WLU (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Have discussed it and after waiting a few weeks for a responce will re add it. It is a useful informative link not self promotionand fully within the guidlines of wikipedia. see discussion on that page Endabusenow (talk) 10:23, 1 January 2008 (UTC)