User talk:RichardInJapan

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

Okinawa
Welcome and thanks for your contribution. Unfortunately the links you posted can be considered spam and were removed. Please refer to WP:LINKSPAM. Happy editing! imars (talk) 12:01, 13 May 2009 (UTC)


 * RE Your question about why I judged your link to be link spam: First of all, I willingly concede that since you live on the island in question, you certainly are quite knowledgable about the island and I am certain much of your content is probably correct. However I see several problems with adding the link: 1. You say you do not make money from the website, but on your contact page you say that you are accepting offers for advertising. So in this sense you are using Wikipedia to promote your own website by linking from the relevant articles. Your intentions do not seem clear to me. 2. Although this does not meet the qualification exactly, Wikipedia is about verifiability. The information you provide may be correct on your website, but how can readers verify the information. To you provide links to resources which users can use to check your claims? You are placing your link in the External link section so the bar does not have to be as high as in Wikipedia articles themselves, but I think the question still remains. 3. Wikipedia does not include original research. Again, because the link is an external link so the bar is not so high, but your website includes your own research, though it may well be accurate. Because it is not verifiable it loses its value. My main complaint though is that you are linking to your own website. If you do not agree with me, I would suggest that you explain the situation on the Talk pages of the two articles. I may argue against you, but perhaps you can win some people over to your view. Another option would be to update the articles in question with content from your site, but provide links and references to verifiable sources for the information. See the 5 pillars in the welcome links for more information. imars (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I posted and answer on my talk page.imars (talk) 06:17, 15 May 2009 (UTC)