User talk:Stefanvaduva

Welcome to Wikipedia.

Please see WP:NOT.

I've deleted the external link to Vamist in the Foreign exchange article because it does not meet the requirements for external links. see WP:EL. This article has a long history of "spamming" links, where firms try to sell their trading services, etc. Vamist is what is known as an "ad farm." Ad farms are not needed in the article and I remove all links to them to maintain the article quality. Smallbones 11:24, 21 September 2007 (UTC)


 * There are only 5 ads and they are ONLY on the first page and they are not abot forex... Anyway, if I put a link to the forum page (http://forum.vamist.com/forums.html) where traders talk about forex and the only advertisement is a Google AdSense block, is ok? On the forum are articles about forex, trading strategies, market analysis, etc. And nobody ask for money and they do NOT sell anything. I'll wait for your answer before adding again the link. After I've read WP:EL, I don't see why that link should not be in the article...

Don't think so
Sorry, but this article has been so over-run by spammers that sometimes it seems the whole article is about selling forex trading services. Under wp:el "Links to avoid" the following might best describe my objections
 * 1. Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article.
 * It is a forum about forex so anybody can post anything... Unique content can be added on a daily basis by the members of the community. Stefanvaduva 12:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 2. Any site that misleads the reader by use of factually inaccurate material or unverifiable research. See Reliable sources for explanations of the terms "factually inaccurate material" or "unverifiable research".
 * The community is moderated and some of the members are active traders taht know the market very well. If someone tries to provide inaccurate informations, the community will react and the informations will be corrected.. just like on wikipedia (an example: http://forum.vamist.com/good-broker-t1285.html) Stefanvaduva 12:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)
 * 5. Links to sites with objectionable amounts of advertising.
 * The "objectionable amounts of advertising" is relative and it can be interpreted in many ways. The only ads on that website are on the first page (4 or 5 micro banners on the right.. that are not linked with forex) and some adsense ads. If the link inserted in the article will be http://forum.vamist.com/forums.html, the only ads will be in one AdSense block (without the banners that are on the first page)... Is this amount objectionable? Stefanvaduva 12:46, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Smallbones 12:01, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Help to solve this
Does the external link http://forum.vamist.com/forums.html violate any rules?
 * If you believe it will help encyclopaedic readers, that it actively backs up the article and isn't SPAM then there shouldn't be a problem  Ryan Lupin  (talk/contribs) 15:37, 25 September 2007 (UTC)
 * Yes, I really think that it can help readers because they can ask questions about Forex and engage in a more active conversation. I will add that link again in a few hours. In this time I hope that I will also have Smallbones opinion. Thank you for your time, Ryan! Stefanvaduva 16:02, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

I'm sorry but this is a classic problem in this article - people posting their favorite blogs, trading platforms, talk forums, or commercial links - none of which need to be there. Maybe 100 in the last year. No thanks, the article doesn't need it. Please see an administrator (maybe User:Hu12). I don't have time to explain this 3 times to everybody who wants there favorite site up there. Smallbones 00:06, 30 September 2007 (UTC)


 * Unfortunatly discussion forums/groups are Links normally to be avoided--Hu12 07:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Ok! Too bad because I think that a discussion forum where users can ask questions about forex and find out things that are not included in WP can be a valuable resource. Although I don't agree with this, I will respect the rules and I will not add the link again. Thanks! Stefanvaduva 13:56, 6 October 2007 (UTC)