User talk:Karimayubar

Your edit to Self-publishing
Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links. Wikipedia is not a mere directory 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, then 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. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:07, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory 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 policy for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:13, 23 February 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. --Dirk Beetstra T C 10:25, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Your edit to self-publishing
I appreciate the note you dropped on my talk page, but there are several reasons your external link keeps getting deleted from Self-publishing. One, it is a blog. Blogs normally are not considered appropriate external links according to Wikipedia policy. See links normally to be avoided #11. The exception to this rule is when the blog is written by a recognized authority. Two, the content is extremely similar to material already contained in much higher-quality external links which are actually websites instead of blogs. Therefore, your external link adds little or nothing to the article. The third reason your external link keeps getting deleted is that it has been the subject of a low-scale reversion war for some time, with possible sockpuppet involvement and some conflict of interest issues. Once an external link has been deleted a few times by experienced editors, it tends to get deleted on sight from then on, especially if the person adding the links seems to be intent on squirming around the rules. If your work gets reverted, the proper way to address the issue is to raise the issue on the article's talk page (not the personal talk pages of the editors who keep reverting you) then see if you can get consensus on your side, and, if consensus agrees with you, then you can add the link. Even so, it is not a raw voting process, but is done according to policy and rules. For example, if your blog does not fall under links normally to be avoided #11 because you actually are a recognized authority, then you would introduce evidence to support that claim (such as articles that mention you) on Talk:Self-publishing. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 17:38, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

You should be aware
Your current activities appear to be those of a sockpuppet or meatpuppet. Recent suspicious activity has centered around adding the external link http://selfpublishingguide.blogspot.com to Self-publishing. You should be aware that blogs are not normally considered appropriate external links (see Links normally to be avoided #11). There have been a flood of users trying to continually add this link. Adding your own site violates Conflict of interest guidelines, and using sockpuppets to get around these rules or engage in edit wars is generally considered vandalism and strongly discouraged. If you are not a part of this very suspicious pattern, I apologize for including you in this, but you can see why things appear that way. However, if you are a sockpuppet, I must warn you to desist and, if you believe your link was taken out of the article in error, then fight to get it back by working within the rules. For example, by starting a discussion on the article's talk page to seek concensus. If this rule-breaking behavior continues without any attempt to work within the rules, various consequences could result, including your website being added to the Spam blacklist. Mermaid from the Baltic Sea 17:40, 1 March 2007 (UTC)