User talk:Ulfarf

it's a FACT ... THC causes apoptosis in cancer cells
Read untill you are convinced. here are reliable sources stating THC causes apoptosis in cancer cells https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=da&as_sdt=0,5&q=thc+cancer+cells+apoptosis

And then correct the cancer section of this article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ulfarf (talk • contribs) 12:24, 6 May 2016 (UTC)

August 2014
Warning definition of "spam" used in following material is not lexical!

Hello, I'm Tutelary. I wanted to let you know that I removed an external link you added to the page Chat room because it seemed inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thanks. Tutelary (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Online chat with this edit. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links may include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a website 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. Tutelary (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Webcam with this edit. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Thank you. Tutelary (talk) 22:57, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you harm Wikipedia, as you did at Videoconferencing with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Tutelary (talk) 23:04, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

This is your last warning; the next time you harm Wikipedia, as you did at List of video telecommunication services and product brands with this edit, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Tutelary (talk) 23:09, 2 August 2014 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing to vandalise article following final warning. 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. Keith D (talk) 23:18, 2 August 2014 (UTC)


 * First, I am not an administrator, and the blocking was done by Keith D. You continued to link to the aforementioned website, and even at one point replaced certain bits of information on an article to do so. Do you understand why the editing was declared by me as Spam and given a warning as such?
 * Note that in your unblock request, you are somewhat encouraged to show that you understand the reason for the block and that it will not happen again. I am willing to assume good faith, as re blocks are very cheap, but I'm sure the blocking administrator will need a thorough explanation on what you did, why it was contravene to Wikipedia's policy and guidelines, and how you will avoid editing in such a manner which got you blocked in the first place.
 * It should also be noted that I -am not- an administrator. What I've outlined before you is simply my advice from me to you, the administrator who blocked you may have more/less requirements than that for the possibility of an unblock. Tutelary (talk) 04:26, 3 August 2014 (UTC)

I can see I should not have replaced that bit of information and Yes i will read the guidelines before posting again. I may require a bit more explanation on why it is spam since the link is not a personal homepage nor advertising or promotion and I can't see how to become an affiliate of this website there is no affiliation program. the website does not promote a product. In fact there is nothing related to promotion on that webpage. I genuinely wanted to share my knowledge about favorite webcam chat. So please help me figure out why it is spam?


 * By the way I hope the user name internalaffaires is not taken it is also fun chasing "cops" being to hard on genuine soft hearted people. What happened to the costumer is always right. And is genuinely the purpose of wikipediea to damage websites "Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines." Maybe this is a warning to every website? Keep away from wiki! HIGH RISK OF RANDOM SITES BEING PENLIZED BY SEARCH ENGINES I hope for the decency of wiki is able forgive beginner mistakes and not behave worse than Darth Wader or gestapo. Of course new ip new username new email promoting random sites can be used as a cyber weapon demoting competors sites!!! now that's a weapon that should not be allowed, and far to easily a subject of abuse. I would definitely expect higher ethical standard of such a big organization. If you are an admin I know you are intelligent a enough under stand that kind of abuse. Now the great question is will apple have it's website demoted if steven jobs joins wiki and writes a link to apples hompage 4 times? Maybe conspiracy theorist will start telling stories about wiki being corrupt and blacklisting homepages for a pay who knows or even global wiki dominance? We demote every Homepage so there is only wiki left... Now Back to the real world I ask the Big Question: Can users of wiki still link to wiki due to a very strict spamming policy. Is linking from a search engine to wiki also SPAM! And will wiki ask google to remove all it's links to wiki except the links with the search words "encyclopedia" and "Wikipedia" to avoid wiki getting promoted as promoting wiki is a big "no no" according to it's own policy? Is the collection of links to wiki on "search engines" really spam according to wiki? The answer is YES! Now I'll be watching in excitement what happens? will wiki self annihilate only time will tell.

If you see a point in my writings pleas leave a comment...


 * Note to reviewing admin: this user's sole contributions, other than the walls of text on this page, have been to add links to a domain apparently owned by this user. --jpgordon:==( o ) 14:05, 9 August 2014 (UTC)
 * As the person who reported him to WP:AIV, I opt to give him some rope so that he could hang himself. Tutelary (talk) 14:06, 9 August 2014 (UTC)

May 2016
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Cannabis (drug), without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Facebook is not a reliable source. – S. Rich (talk) 12:28, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Edit warring
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war&#32; according to the reverts you have made on Tetrahydrocannabinol. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. Jytdog (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

I only use verifiable data in my entries. I do not edit war(sombody reverted while I was editing). I make edits i'm quite sure are right and have been established as facts through multiple sources. Ulfarf (talk) 18:41, 7 May 2016 (UTC)