User talk:MewNedia

January 2012
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added 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. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 21:59, 6 January 2012 (UTC)


 * Wiki entries for many of North Carolina's 100 counties are replete with links to local media. Are you suggesting that the external links to local newspapers/news sites, television and radio stations and other journalistic outlets are inappropriate for Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MewNedia (talk • contribs) 11:07, 7 January 2012 (UTC)
 * Far from it. Reliable source, real newspaper/TV/other online sources are completely appropriate for external links. I know many county articles may need clean up (WP:OTHERSPAMEXISTS), but that is no excuse for adding more inappropriate links. An anonymous IP (65.87.178.175) had tried to add these previously as well and they were deleted. The links to sites you put on really amount to purely promotional/spam edits. The .countync.us links put on by you and Web update appear to be simply spamming. The "county news" sites put on are not real or independent sources. They are all simply sub-domains of one site. They all generate the same content, just have different made-up county page names. There are no by-lines, simply "Staff Reports". Looks like the site is purely made to generate ad revenue. Please do not use Wikipedia for advertising. Thank you. -- JoannaSerah (talk) 20:21, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Your response has a lot of subjectivity: "appear to be", "looks like", being the judge of what is "real". I'll continue to watch these sites and should they improve I will post external links them again. Your ability to be objective also deserves a watchful eye.