User talk:Jayiconcmo

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ~, which will automatically produce your name and the date.
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or place  on your talk page and ask your question there. Again, welcome!

Adding links
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Church software 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 constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. – Fayenatic L (talk) 21:31, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for the reply. I am not understanding which rule is the issue. I had someone jump all over me after I posted an informational accounting books for churches. Can you advise me why this is not allowed and how I can get it so it can be allowed? Here is the link to the book. If the person actually read through the book you will see that it references IRS, FASB and other guidelines for churches in the USA. It also has a test for churches as a resource and is published under the creative commons law. http://www.iconcmo.com/church-guide/fund-accounting-for-church-leadership/Fund-Accounting-for-Church-Leadership.pdf Can you help me.... Jayiconcmo (talk) 17:07, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

April 2012
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Church software. 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. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. 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. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC) ==April 2012 I believe that the person monitoring the church software should ensure that the links churchinfo be removed because of spam. Additionally the ones that go no where are the following - Software solutions for growing churches Software manages while pastors minister What can church management software do What I am including - An ebook which cites specific fund acocunting (since there is no specific example yet on this) that churches need and must adhere too as per many governement agencies. These agencies are cited in the ebook which is 40 pages in length and can not be put into the wiki. Jayiconcmo (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Church software. 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. Theroadislong (talk) 15:37, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Are you getting my previous message?

This is your last warning. The next time you insert a spam link, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. 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. Theroadislong (talk) 16:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

I am trying to work with the rules and want you to tell me the exact rule I am not following. I did read through them and do not see where information about church accounting breaks the rules of spamming. Additionally, did you not read my message from earlier? I copied it below and want to know why these links are not removed?

The link churchinfo be removed because of spam. Additionally the ones that go no where are the following - What I am including - An ebook which cites specific fund acocunting (since there is no specific example yet on this) that churches need and must adhere too as per many governement agencies. These agencies are cited in the ebook which is 40 pages in length and can not be put into the wiki. Jayiconcmo (talk) 15:19, 27 April 2012 (UTC) Jayiconcmo
 * 1) Software solutions for growing churches (item 16 non functioning issue)
 * 2) Software manages while pastors minister
 * 3) What can church management software do


 * I skim-read the whole book. It's nicely done, but I would classify it as marketing dressed up as a white paper; such things are offered free by many software vendors. It explains some accounting at a basic level, and ends with a couple of pages that gently promote a product. It has a mixture of country-specific advice about US GAAP, and generic introductory advice for laymen about fund accounting. IMHO, neither of those are particularly germane to an international encyclopedia page about church software. – Fayenatic L (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for looking at it and giving your opinion. The reason we believe it is important is because there is only a few companies that do fund accounting and I hate to say it none of them have ever put out an ebook on what to look for in an accounting package and what guidelines you should follow. I did not see the country specific issue you brought up, however that can be easily fixed by saying something like US industry standards require .... in the description. I prefer to not address the laymen comment when it comes to churches and the general audience that would read this subject.

Have you addressed the other links on that page? The link churchinfo be removed because of spam. Additionally the ones that go no where are the following - Jayiconcmo (talk) 17:56, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * 1) Software solutions for growing churches (item 16 non functioning issue)
 * 2) Software manages while pastors minister
 * 3) What can church management software do


 * It's still not particularly relevant to a page on church software. Your e-book might be more relevant to the article Fund accounting, if anything, but I'm not sure that would comply with the WP:EL policy either. That page ought to explain fund accounting in a way that a layman could understand, without the need for external links giving simple worked examples about telephone expenses.
 * For the country-specific issue, see page 3 of your book which explains that FASB = US GAAP.
 * Thank you for pointing out the dead links on the Church software page. Yes, I have just fixed those.
 * The Churchinfo link is given as a citation because the independent surveys of church management software explicitly exclude open source programs; therefore a citation for open source church software is needed, and it was the best that I could find. If you are aware of any survey or published independent advice that includes such software, please feel free to suggest that we use it instead. – Fayenatic L (talk) 18:14, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments and your welcome for the links that were broke. I did not check them all so you may want to. If that is the case with the open source then that should be cited as such and why.

Unfortunately I do not agree about FASB = GAAP and it takes experts like us to show people that. It also takes experts like us to show people that are not familiar (Wiki) that churches or the general population may not know what is involved with a church. If you were a church planter and never did it before would you know to look for fund accounting software? NO. You would know that you need church software. That is why church software should have every type of software listed. This was my attempt to do it and the community as a whole will lose out. I will not be adding anything to Wiki from here on out because of the rules that to me are inconsistent in certain post that I have been researching in comparison to this post. The ebook was made for the laymen person to understand just like an encyclopedia was suppose to be. While this may sound like a strong letter it is meant to let the Wiki admins know that when someone has good intentions and are new they should work with them and not against them like the other person did. (Theroadislong) I do thank you for you time Fayenatic. Jayiconcmo (talk) 18:38, 27 April 2012 (UTC)


 * OK, to be more specific, SFAS = US GAAP. They used to be numbered with the prefix FASB after the body which issues them. Anyway, I think we both know what we mean.


 * According to the survey in CC magazine, "Automatically Tracks Multiple Fund Balances" is a pretty common feature in church management software. We used to have a table of church software including IconCMO) but it was inevitably incomplete, so I still think it was better to refer to an independent survey comparing programs.


 * About the Wiki admins: we use standard messages to respond to issues as we perceive them, but sometimes they can come across as heavy-handed. Sorry you got some of that. We do try to be fair and accountable, and there are ways to take things up if you feel that inconsistencies need to be addressed. – Fayenatic L  (talk) 18:49, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Proof reading
In order that you can take something useful away from this, page 18 of your book seems to have an error message "missing column". – Fayenatic L (talk) 18:49, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out. We produce the ebook using several programs and that keeps on getting in there. It is removed. If possible could you tell us which pages would have to be removed from the ebook for it to not appear as spam or advertisement and be able to be shown on Wiki? We can remove pages in this thing easily. Jayiconcmo (talk) 20:32, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * It was the actual link to the e-book that was spam (ie a link promoting your own content), not the content of the link. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promoting your own ideas, it relies on reliable third party resources. Additionally you say "we" whereas Wikipedia accounts are strictly for individuals only not for groups. Kind regardsTheroadislong (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Have a look at WP:Identifying reliable sources as well as WP:External links. At the moment I don't see that linking to this e-book would add much to either article church software or fund accounting, whether offered as a citation or as an external link. Sorry to disappoint you. – Fayenatic L (talk) 20:30, 30 April 2012 (UTC)