User talk:LEHarth

An editor has nominated C. Ernst Harth, an article on which you have worked or that you created, for deletion. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also "What Wikipedia is not"). Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ). You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate. Thank you. Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. Jayden54Bot 13:17, 1 February 2007 (UTC)

Linkspam
Please cease adding ObyGynNet to every obstetric topic. It is considered linkspam and a breach of WP:EL. Gillyweed 01:27, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Please cease adding linkspam to WP. It is considered vandalism and you will be blocked from using WP. Gillyweed 01:32, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

OBGYN.net, as I said, is a legitimate and recognized online medical journal publication and, as all publications do, we have advertisements to pay for the existence of the website. The contents of our website consist of original scientific research on groundbreaking diagnostic and treatment modalities for all aspects of women's health thus making it an extremely relevant and valuable resource and a most appropriate external link on all pages that the link was submitted to.

What I did notice is that some of the other external links listed are websites that were created as hosting space for advertisements and I know this because I receive solicitations from these websites daily asking for link exchanges.

In order to offer a fair balance between factual information and accessibility to a database of medical information from Internationally recognized key opinion leaders, research experts and innovators of women's health I made sure to include a link to OBGYN.net on all pages we have content for.

If you would like to take some time to actually review the material on OBGYN.net and then make your decision as to whether the link is appropriate then you are certainly most welcome to do so. But to remove the link without exploring any of the nearly 800,000 pages of well documented original scientific content based upon your suppositions and assumptions to the value of the content seems to be a little biased.

Lea Harth Operations Manager OBGYN.net / MediSpecialty.com Lea.Harth@MediSpecialty.com --LEHarth 02:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Please note Lea that we should keep this discussion on one talk page. Either yours or mine.  Here is the response I posted on my talk page: :: Thank you for your comments.  Please feel free to delete any other external links that exist mostly for advertising purposes.  Please also review WP:COI.   Whilst I understand your point of view, to an outsider it looks like a blatant attempt to increase web traffic rather than provide information for if the latter was your goal then the external link would point directly to the relevant page on OBGYN.net rather than to the home page with all the advertising.  Particularly note the WP policy here: [].  Thanks Gillyweed 02:15, 28 February 2007 (UTC)