User talk:Garthcontractor

June 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Construction of One World Trade Center has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:52, 1 June 2015 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: Construction of One World Trade Center was changed by Garthcontractor (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.882515 on 2015-06-01T22:52:37+00:00.

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Piping. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Repeated vandalism can result in the loss of editing privileges. DemocraticLuntz (talk) 23:38, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Construction of One World Trade Center. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Reify-tech (talk) 23:48, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link, as you did at Piping. 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. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 00:01, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Possible misunderstandings all around
Your initial edits on Wikipedia seem to have gotten a rough reception, but I think there are misunderstandings on multiple sides, and hope they can be resolved. Your first edit on Construction of One World Trade Center triggered the anti-spam bot, probably because you hijacked an existing reference (albeit a dead one). You then re-inserted it, without change and without explanation, and it was removed by me, reinserted by you, and removed again by another editor. By simply reverting repeatedly without explanation, you risk running afoul of the WP:3RR rule, which could get your account blocked. In addition, you made another edit on Piping, which was similarly reverted by other editors.

On the possibility that your edits were made in good faith, I came back and took a look at the content, which does *not* appear to be as blatantly promotional as was first believed. Please do not simply revert edits made by other editors, without attempting to explain or discuss your reasons. Repeated reversions will not win you any friends, allies, or respect.

I think this whole sequence of events was triggered by your changing a dead link reference, a technique often used by spammers. If instead you had left the original reference and simply added your new one after it, you would not have been reverted. Other editors would have looked at your addition, and probably would have accepted it. The real problem here is that experienced editors sometimes have to deal with large amounts of vandalism and spamming, and you behavior looked very unhelpful.

To break this unfortunate cycle, I hereby offer an apology for my revert to your content, which appeared to be well-intentioned. I cannot control the other experienced editors involved, but I think they would give you another chance if you show that you understand the situation and are willing to change. I hope that your future experiences with Wikipedia editing will be more fruitful. Cheers! Reify-tech (talk) 00:58, 2 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I actually just read all of the community features. I appreciate the feedback.
 * I too would like to apologize for my perhaps hasty reversion. While it appeared spammy from the outside due to the reinsertion of reverted links, I would have done well to take a somewhat deeper look and figure out you did in fact mean well. I'm glad User:Reify-tech did so.


 * If you need help figuring things out on Wikipedia, feel free to ask me either here or on my talkpage. If you ask it here and I haven't responded in a while, please feel free to ping me by adding to your talkpage. Welcome to Wikipedia and my apologies for my part in the misunderstanding. AddWittyNameHere (talk) 04:32, 2 June 2015 (UTC)