User talk:Ownclassesinfo

Welcome!
Hello, Ownclassesinfo, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Common Law Admission Test, seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, please see: If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia: I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Ravensfire ( talk ) 18:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Policy on neutral point of view
 * Guideline on spam
 * Guideline on external links
 * Guideline on conflict of interest
 * FAQ for Organizations
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and how to develop articles
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * Article wizard for creating new articles
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Help me!
What to do if i got broken link link on wikipedia? Actually i got the link is broken, so i changed that link with same a working link which is having same contents.

Ownclassesinfo (talk) 19:21, 5 October 2017 (UTC) ownclassesinfo


 * The preferred thing to do is find an archived link to the source, so we know we're using the exact same thing. The alternative is to provide a link to another reliable site with the same information. However, it's bad form to link to your own website. —C.Fred (talk) 19:25, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Now i have two questions in my mind: First one is: How others website is linked with wikipedia if not allowed? Second one is: Why someone will help to fix wikipedia content if he/she not allowed to link websites?


 * It's one thing when an independent party links a website that is a reliable source. It's quite another when a user is linking to their own website. I note that your username is the same as the name of the website. —C.Fred (talk) 19:45, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Yes i now, but you should also note that the archived article is save as i have mentioned in new link. As you can see by placing new link, wikipedia and users both will get same articles which was there before. and who reading archived version content is very very slow also not mobile friendly at all.


 * Something you forgot to mention was the link you added was to ownclasses.com, and the article is a direct copy of the original article, except you've changed the article date and author name, and couldn't be bothered to give any attribution or credit to the original source. In other words, it's a blatant copyright violation that you're trying to pass off as your own work and spam a link into Wikipedia.  Please don't add links to your website to Wikipedia, it clearly fails as a reliable source given the blatant copyright violation. Ravensfire ( talk ) 20:11, 5 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Also, Wikipedia policies state that we may not link to sites that are blatant copyright violations. —C.Fred (talk) 20:14, 5 October 2017 (UTC

Yes right, this is a direct copy of that article but as i know when main website does not exists then there should not a copyright problem. well i can put source link of archive but i think it's a better to use official link as i have mentioned in article.


 * I've already handled putting an archive link on the source. Copyright doesn't expire if the website goes down, you've got a misconception there.  Your website is NOT an official link - it's a blatant copy that's copyright violation and you couldn't even be bothered to acknowledge that you stole the work from some other site.  Please don't try to add it or other links to your website to Wikipedia given the above issues. Ravensfire ( talk ) 20:28, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

It's ok, How could i explain that original website is house building website but article is related to Common Law Admission Test (CLAT). that is not a genuine like so they have removed that page.


 * You're only digging your hole deeper, if you're claiming that you're stealing from sites that aren't even authoritative. —C.Fred (talk) 20:49, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for clear all things You are treating like a firewall, which just protects from outgoing and incoming connections and doesn't matters what's going on inside. Thanks C.Fred