User talk:Morriskahn

February 2015
Hello, I'm Rsrikanth05. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Countertenor because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Rsrikanth05 (talk) 20:31, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Pierre Bernac. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Stesmo (talk) 20:45, 23 February 2015 (UTC)

Frédéric Chopin
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Frédéric Chopin. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Smerus (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Stfg (talk) 20:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest guidance
Hello there. I just wanted to explain why you have been getting these messages. The books you have been listing in biographical articles under a "Writings" section which were written by the subject are potentially fine. A few of the "Further reading" ones are potentially useful, but many are not. e.g. Mozart and the Pianist added to Mozart, which is essentially a guide for pianists on how to play Mozart's piano music. It is never appropriate to add books as "Sources" or "References", unless they have been actually used as such in the writing of the article.

In any case, all this is a form of spamming and possibly prompted by the fact that Kahn and Averill have recently launched their new website? You need to read the guidance at WP:COI for editors with a conflict of interest, suggest future book additions on article talk pages, and let uninvolved editors assess whether they are worth adding. If you are an employee of the company doing this as part of your job or have been hired by the company to add these books to Wikipedia, this is considered "paid editing". In those cases, you must disclose your connection and the name the employer or client for whom you work. Terms of use/FAQ on paid contributions without disclosure has more guidance on this. Voceditenore (talk) 08:32, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Actually, on closer inspection your edits to the "Writings" section of Pierre Bernac were not potentially OK. You replaced the information about the date and publisher of the first editions of the books with information solely about their reprints by Kahn and Averill (often many years later) which is very misleading to the reader. Please do not do that again and note that these additions/changes you have been making were not minor edits. Please do not mark them as such. Likewise, when adding new "Writings" sections, we list the publisher and date of the first edition. The addition of the OCLC template allows the reader to view all subsequent editions and formats. Voceditenore (talk) 11:04, 2 March 2015 (UTC)