User talk:MCrawford

Regarding edits made during May 10 2006 (UTC)
Adding commercial external links to articles is considered vandalism. If you continue to use Wikipedia for advertising, you will be blocked from editing. If this is an IP address, and it is shared by multiple users, ignore this warning if you were not the one who added spam links. (ESkog)(Talk) 01:14, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Can we compromise on links to the forums only? I noticed that one of the links on MathCounts was a form for purchasing curriculum materials, and I'm not as comfortable with that as I am with the forum. (ESkog)(Talk) 01:25, 10 May 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the compromise on forums seems more than fair. After a little looking around, I have a better understanding of the spirit of Wikipedia and hope to contribute in many regards.

AoPS forum
Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. —Ruud 19:35, 21 May 2006 (UTC)

I think this is a misunderstanding. I haven't been linking to commercial material, only to free material. This is done in many instances on the same pages and by other users and I don't see the difference. If possible, can you show me which links offend you and explain why?


 * See WP:EL. It's a forum, so it doesn't add any encyclopedic value to the articles. —Ruud 02:53, 24 May 2006 (UTC)''

I don't follow your logic on this one. Would the name of a library dedicated to a topic not be encyclopedic? Encyclopedic by its very nature is inclusive of all information important to a subject, including references. At least, that's the way I've always understood it. I am interested in an interpretation that excludes forums in that regard so that I can understand your position better. Many reference pages are cited around wikipedia. What's the difference? That they aren't still being edited?

[Edit} I read the external link spamming page which suggested that the importance of the forum link (essentially) determines whether or not it is appropriate for wikipedia. I feel that these links are of high quality and more appropriate than usual given the dynamic subjects involved. I can make the case more explicitly if prompted.

San Diego Math Circle
San Diego Math Circle has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt the subject might not be notable enough for an article. Please review What Wikipedia is not and Notability for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" notice, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod notice, the deletion process will stop, but if an editor is still not satisfied that the article meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may be sent to Articles for deletion for consensus. NickelShoe (Talk) 03:16, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
 * So has Art of Problem Solving Foundation and DLSU Mathematics Circle. NickelShoe (Talk) 03:20, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Art of Problem Solving Foundation


The article Art of Problem Solving Foundation has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This company does not meet the rules and policies for having it's own article (WP:ORG)

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Mtking (talk) 03:34, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Art of Problem Solving Foundation for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Art of Problem Solving Foundation is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Art of Problem Solving Foundation until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Mtking (talk) 09:21, 4 April 2011 (UTC)