User talk:Montgomery-Swan

License tagging for Image:Billy Sheehan BGM cover.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Billy Sheehan BGM cover.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 16:05, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

RIBEX
I have added a "" template to the article RIBEX, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Gimboid13 21:30, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

As a new user I am really confused. I understand Wikipedia to be a resource and not an advertising service and therefore I double checked the appropriateness of placing a page for RIBEX, and annual exhibition for Rigid Inflatable Boats by seeing if any other exhibitions have valid pages. The Ideal Home Exhibition and the London Boat Show both have allowed pages, so I can't understand why this page has been deleted for exactly the same discussion matter?
 * The difference is one of verifiability and reliable sources. Articles need a list of sources used to create them, because that's the best way for our readers to check that they're actually true; if an article doesn't have enough sources to verify it, there's no evidence that its subject is notable for inclusion. --ais523 17:54, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

helpme But on the original page I gave an external link to the exhibition's website which if visited shows photographs of the actual show taking place - what could be more reliable than this, photographic evidence. London Boat Show page does not have more sources listed? Please can you help over this, I need to understand.

{helpme} Can I have a response on this please, as there seems to be some rules for some and some rules for others?


 * Well, reliable sources need to be third-party, talking about the subject. You can't just link to the official website (I could have the Commander Keane's Boat Show website for example). Reliable sources could be magazines, books and newspaper articles. Sometimes it does seem that there are rules for some and some rules for others - this just indicates that Wikipedia is a big place and there is lots of stuff we need to improve/delete. Also, I read your first draft of the article and the language did not seem neutral, eg "superlative venue" - Wikipedia uses a much more boring tone generally.


 * Do you want me to restore the article so you can have a go at improving it? Just drop a not on my talk page :-)--Commander Keane 08:45, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Links to your acousticmagazine.com website
You seem to be having problems understanding the Wikipedia policy on external links. Just to reiterate a few points, the following categories of links should be avoided:
 * Links mainly intended to promote a website.
 * Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services. For example, instead of linking to a commercial bookstore site, use the "ISBN" linking format, giving readers an opportunity to search a wide variety of free and non-free book sources.
 * Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content.
 * Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject: the link should be directly related to the subject of the article. A general site that has information about a variety of subjects should usually not be linked to from an article on a more specific subject. Similarly, a website on a specific subject should usually not be linked to an article about a general subject. If a section of a general website is devoted to the subject of the article, and meets the other criteria for linking, then that part of the site could be deep-linked.

You should also familiarize yourself with the guidelines on external link spamming.

In this edit, you added the following link to the Mandolin article: Mandolin instructional column

As far as I can tell (and please do correct me if I'm mistaken), it is not possible to access the "Mandolin instructional column" of your magazine from the home page of your website. In other words, the only reason you inserted this link was to promote your website and sell more magazines. That isn't what Wikipedia is for. If you can't link directly to useful content, then don't. -- Sakurambo 桜ん坊  21:18, 23 May 2007 (UTC)