User talk:Peacepalacelibraryjurist

Bold text== Edits to Animal Rights article ==

Please look at WP:EL for some guidelines about what sort of links are appropriate for Wiki. Search result links such as you ahve been posting are really not very helpful and are not considered appropriate. There also appears to be a conflict of interest since the links you are tyring to place seem very similar to your user name - this, too, is a violation of wiki policy. Thanks Bob98133 (talk) 14:13, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Dear Bob

I am new at this wiki - editing. But I studied law and philosophy and philosophy and animal ethics was also part of my study. The section of the bibliography is solely about works concerning the philosophy of animal law and ethics. I work at the library. This link was posted in order to help people find relevant material about the philosophy of law. How can you consider that as inappropriate material? I was really a bit offended by your reaction to take off the page immediately!


 * Sorry about immediately reverting your edits, but that's the way Wiki works. If you object to an edit being removed, you can replace it and enter your reasons for replacing it on the talk(discussion) page for the article. At that point, the discussion should be resolved and a consensus reached before the item is changed again. Read the Wiki help pages and policy especially about adding external links - which links are appropriate and which are not. Generally, the results of a search engine, even a specific one such as you've added, are not valuable links. There is no content when you go to that link, only a list of content that may or may not be relevant to the information you are looking for. The idea is that an EL should take you to new content that amplifies or explains existing statements. Otherwise Google would be a link on all articles!


 * The second problem is that there is a conflict of interest in you posting these links since you work at the library. While I believe you are sincere in trying to provide information, usually when this is done it is by commercial interests trying to promote a product or service - which, in effect, is what you are doing by trying to drive web traffic to your site. Again, read through the help pages for an understanding of this. Sorry about being heavy handed. I got slammed the same way when I started editing Wiki, so it's just a case of learning the rules - for example, if you can find material in your library that supports or references some material in the article, it would be acceptible to add that as a reference in the text (not as an EL). I hope this helps. Bob98133 (talk) 15:06, 7 August 2008 (UTC)

Hi Bob

but why are so many other sites such as Stanford Encyclopedia (which is part of Stanford University) allowed to draw people to visit their website with information about philosophy and people that make a bibliography (the Peace Palace Library is also an institute) not able to do that? Both insitutes try to offer a service and both do not do it to get money but to provide people with academic material such as books or articles.

Currently there also are some problems at the bibliography website since not all results are showed in the context of the bibliography. Only 21 links were available while I have collected 110 articles, books and other items. I am not done yet with this topic - I will add items as soon as we receive new books or articles about this subject. I am also thinking about creating a PDF bibliography about Animal Ethics some day which I will also put in my bibliography. This is just one of the topics in the bibliography on philosophy of law. But not all the articles and books are available due to an error in the system and I am dependent on someone else to fix that error. Unfortunately he will not be here for a while(vacation). All items are always available by browsing the catalogue of the peace palace.