User talk:Seonaster

April 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used as a platform for advertising or promotion, and doing so is contrary to the goals of this project. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --bonadea contributions talk 19:15, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

-- A. B. (talk • contribs) 20:00, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Domain-tracking:

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to chiropractic. 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 web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site 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 article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Tim Vickers (talk) 17:10, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at chiropractic, you may be blocked from editing. Tim Vickers (talk) 20:07, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of GH Fitness


The article GH Fitness has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Partly copied from http://ww.ghfitness.ccom/29,about-us.html. It is also advertising

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion.  Wilbysuffolk   Talk to me  12:48, 9 October 2011 (UTC)

March 2015
Hello, I'm Bahudhara. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Koala because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Materialscientist (talk) 00:18, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Hi there

Seonaster (talk) 03:57, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * Are you sure? Google makes ikoala.com.au look an awful lot like a sketchy deal site that we'd block per WP:ELNO. Please consider another defense, because we weren't born yesterday. Origamiteⓣⓒ 04:19, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Well Origamite if you check the link http://www.ikoala.com.au/koalafactsheet. Google? what about that? Kindly read carefully on the links out there. It has also scientific name that included on the fact sheet which is informative about koalas.

Seonaster (talk) 05:02, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
 * I don't want to get a computer virus or half a billion pop-up ads. While it's possible that a website which shows "98% off" deals when trawled by Google's bots is really about koalas, I doubt it. Origamiteⓣⓒ 05:23, 8 March 2015 (UTC)

Well that is I believed it is a helpful that is why I include on the ref coz when I read those it is helpful to me. I think considering an issue as block if I did not show an informative link. Blocking is too much i think than editing and explaining what it is wrong on the talk. By the way Origamite I dont see a virus out there and what are you talking of half a billion pop up ads? OMG you are out in the discussion.
 * I regret the phrasing of the previous statement--I should have been clearer. What I mean is that I am uncomfortable visiting sites that may contain malicious material, and some websites which are spammed do have malicious material. You were warned about adding links on this talk page before, and over the course of five years you have done nothing but add links to external websites. ~9 instances of only adding links which don't really add to the article over 5 years, and no other edits, is a perfectly reasonable block in my opinion. Origamiteⓣⓒ 15:27, 8 March 2015 (UTC)