User talk:Frtillman

Please do not remove content from Wikipedia. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Mega lodon 99     ( Talk ) 12:44, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

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. OhNo itsJamie Talk 15:23, 5 December 2007 (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. -Andrew c [talk] 20:52, 6 December 2007 (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 as well, preventing anyone from linking to them from all of Wikipedia.-Andrew c [talk] 16:01, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Linking
It appears as if, at least as of lately, your sole purpose here on wikipedia is to promote the website vision.org. When you add links to a webpage to multiple articles, this is considered linking spamming, even if that isn't your intention, and even if the site isn't commercial. WP:SPAM and WP:EL discuss this in further detail. Wikipedia simply isn't a repository for external links. So while the link very well may be interesting, that alone does not mean the link is acceptable. Links need to adhere to all of our major policies. The link must be notable and reliable, the link should cite it's sources and/or be by an expert from the field. However, a single user going to multiple articles to add links to a single website, regardless of the intentions, is seen to be promoting that single website. On top of that, wikipedia is primarily an encyclopedia, and is clearly not a web directory. You should edit wikipedia because you want to add sourced content, and you want to improve the encyclopedia, and you want to make productive edits. You shouldn't edit wikipedia for the purpose of linking to vision.org. So I encourage your efforts to work with the community, as long as you are mindful of our guidelines on external linking. Also, you say that you are associated with the website in question. I ask you to consider WP:COI. Editors are strongly discouraged from editing in matters that could pose a conflict of interest (so linking to your own website is worse than simply link spamming). If you have any questions about any of this, I'd be glad to address them. Please don't be discouraged from being a productive wikipedian. Good luck.-Andrew c [talk] 18:46, 8 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Sorry for the delayed reply. I personally cannot be responsible for every link that is on wikipedia. If you feel a external link that already exists on an article doesn't meet out guidelines, then you are welcome to remove the link yourself. Unfortunately, because wikipedia can be edited by anyone, using other existing content that is poor as justification for more poor content is not usually a valid rationale. My personal advice would be to hang around and start improving article content and learning the ropes here at wikipedia. Once you are comfortable editing articles, then you should have enough experience to know what sort of external links are appropriate or not. Generally, it is almost never appropriate to edit wikipedia for the sole purpose of adding external links, and when you add multiple links to the same webpage, it is considered spamming. I'd say, just for get about linking to external websites for the time being. However, if you really think that this one specific link is helpful, my advice would be to go to the talk page and propose including the link, so more experienced editors can consider your proposal and comment and give constructive criticism (if necessary). Hope this helps.-Andrew c [talk] 15:42, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

November 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Christmas controversy has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: 'geocities\.com' (link(s): http://www.oocities.com/frtillman/xmas.html). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 12:45, 9 November 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Thanksgiving (United States) has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: 'geocities\.com' (link(s): http://www.oocities.com/frtillman/thanks.html). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thoroughly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creator's copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 16:51, 27 November 2008 (UTC)

April 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Larry Langford 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 as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because 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 article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. ALI nom nom 19:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

May 2010
Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Mr.Z-man 14:42, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Trussville, Alabama, you may be blocked from editing. Mild Bill Hiccup (talk) 15:19, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

November 2010
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Circle of latitude, you may be blocked from editing. — GorillaWarfare talk 18:27, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

February 2011
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for vandalism. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. B (talk) 13:27, 27 February 2011 (UTC)