User talk:Mvrockman

Regarding your additions to various articles
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" is strongly discouraged. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:01, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for advertising or promotion. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:03, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional material to Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:04, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, you will be blocked from editing. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 04:06, 9 June 2009 (UTC)

Why was what I put deleted? I understand not using it as advertising, however I feel I was giving a neutral view point. The site is a legitimate site that has been featured in numerous publications including the Wall Street Journal, Time, Chicago Tribune etc. I'm in no way affiliated with the site, just a user who enjoys the services it provides.

June 2009
in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy for. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make constructive contributions. If you believe this block is unjustified, you may contest the block by adding the text  below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

So from what I read, if I replace the external link of the site to the link of the site's wikipedia page, then it would be appropriate? Is that accurate?
 * You are not currently blocked, therefore I have remove the unblock request. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:38, 10 June 2009 (UTC)


 * Re your message: The main problem was indeed that what you added was written with an advertising tone for a non-notable website. I also believe that the content itself was not appropriate for the athletes' articles as it was not particularly notable.  Being the Nth person issued on a sports trading site is not very relevant to their careers or biographies.  I suggest that you discuss the issue with other editors on the athlete's respective Talk pages or WikiProjects and gain a consensus for its inclusion in the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 23:43, 10 June 2009 (UTC)