User talk:Apparition11/Archives/2019
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:Apparition11. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
New Year's 2019
Apparition11,
Have a prosperous, productive and enjoyable New Year, and thanks for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Amaury (talk | contribs) 08:20, 1 January 2019 (UTC)
Send New Year cheer by adding {{subst:Happy New Year fireworks}} to user talk pages.
Bed sizes
Hi,
Thanks for your message. I'm hoping you can help me to act within Wikipedia's guidelines.
While we are a commercial company, we do also write informative blogs about bed linen. Of course, we do benefit from links inbound from Wikipedia, our aim is to provide information about bed linen and bedding, particularly where relevant to our part of the world (we're based in Ireland).
I do believe that the information I posted was informative and useful. For example, there was very little information on mattress depth on Wikipedia (particularly relating to Ireland and UK), and how it varies. I thought that my addition added to that. However, perhaps I was wrong to post a link to our blog. Perhaps if it were to be edited, with the same text but a reference to the blog instead? If so, would it be possible for you to reinstate the text I posted and I can make necessary changes.
Thankyou in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Guineyjp (talk • contribs) 20:03, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
- @Guineyjp: Hello. You really should not add links to any site that you are affiliated with. This is what Wikipedia considers a conflict of interest. The link does not satisfy our criteria for external links or reliable sources and really does not belong. If you could source the content to a reliable source (such as a trade magazine), then the content could definitely be included, just not the link. There are already a lot a poor sources (by Wikipedia's criteria) in the article, so adding more won't be beneficial. The article really does need a clean-up. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:35, 22 January 2019 (UTC)
Neuromarketing
I am not adding spam links! I am not utilising the backlinks for my own benefit! It is to reinforce my point! Marcuslangmaid (talk) 18:05, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
- @Marcuslangmaid: Your links do not satisfy WP:EL or WP:RS and are not appropriate for Wikipedia. To reinforce your point, we need published, third-party sources with a reputation for fact checking. Additionally, based on your username, you have a conflict of interest and should not be adding links to any sites that you are affiliated with. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 18:08, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
I will be careful and follow Wiki guidelines
Hi,
Surely, I will be more careful and follow Wiki guidelines. At the same time will contribute to Wiki in a positive way within the rules.
Thanks Joycebbp (talk) 05:28, 25 February 2019 (UTC) Joycebbp
Bar stool citation removed
Hi - I added a citation to an article showing the growth of bar stools over the last 5 years, which has been removed and wondered why? It was on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bar_stool
90.152.1.254 (talk) 14:07, 16 March 2019 (UTC) Andy
- @90.152.1.254: Hello. It was a blog for a furniture store and not a reliable source. What we need are published, third party sources with a reputation for fact-checking. Further it said that the growth it was showing was "ours", and did not say anything about it industry wide. Also, the blog was obviously trying to sell it bar stools. Hope this helps. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 14:13, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
Ahh I see - while I am in the process of buying some I came across this and thought it might be useful. Not sure how successful you will be finding something that doesn't show something data from an individual company sadly. I shall update this if I do though. 90.152.1.254 (talk) 14:18, 16 March 2019 (UTC) Andy
- @90.152.1.254: Appreciate it, and good luck in your search of bar stools. Hope you find what you're looking for and reasonably priced. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 14:27, 16 March 2019 (UTC)
No heading
No message here, but this is certainly a high-quality set of user pages. JohnSmith13345 (talk) 15:45, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- @JohnSmith13345: Thanks! Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 17:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Remember, remember
Today you lost an hour of sleep. PS: Have you considered breaking your archive into at least years? I sometimes like to go back and read our old conversations, but it can take a while to load and scroll through your current archive. Amaury (talk | contribs) 15:46, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Thanks. Luckily, I woke up early this morning and noticed. The wife had to work this morning, but we had forgotten to set the clock :) Yeah, I do need to do that. That's one of those things that when I orginally set up the auto-archive, I figured aI would set that up "later". Later still hasn't come even after several years... I really do need to get one that sometime. Thanks for the reminder, I hadn't thought about it a long time. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 15:55, 10 March 2019 (UTC)
- On a related note, since I brought it up, do you know if it's possible to set it up exactly how I do things? So once April 1 rolls out in my time zone, the bot would remove March 2019 from my talk page and replace it with an empty April 2019 section and then add the March discussions to User talk:Amaury/2019, removing the "2019" in the process so it's just "March." Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Nice, thanks. When I get around to doing it, I'll probably stalk your page for inspiration :) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 23:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- That doesn't answer my question? lol Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:09, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: lol Oops, sorry about that. I overlooked the "if", thinking you were asking if I was aware that is was possible. Sorry, unfortunately, I don't know. I never got in too deep into studying the archive bots... Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 23:17, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- That doesn't answer my question? lol Amaury (talk | contribs) 23:09, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: Nice, thanks. When I get around to doing it, I'll probably stalk your page for inspiration :) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 23:07, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- On a related note, since I brought it up, do you know if it's possible to set it up exactly how I do things? So once April 1 rolls out in my time zone, the bot would remove March 2019 from my talk page and replace it with an empty April 2019 section and then add the March discussions to User talk:Amaury/2019, removing the "2019" in the process so it's just "March." Amaury (talk | contribs) 21:58, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
Custom signature markup
I'm trying to customize my signature a bit. Do you know what the HTML code for changing a link color is? As you can see, it does not the contrast well. I have my color set to white, but because it's not plain text and rather a link, it's not doing anything. My current code is: <p style="color:#FFFFFF; background-color: #800080;">[[User:Amaury|Amaury]]</p> Add: And the background itself is extending well beyond my name, I just realized, with the timestamp not even inside of it. Amaury 03:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: [[User:Amaury|<span style="background-color: purple; color: white">Amaury</span>]] makes Amaury. I couldn't get it to work with the color hex. I'm not sure why, I would think that it should... Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 13:44, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. Test. (I also wonder if there's a way to make the hover underline match what the text is instead of being the default link blue.) The signature to this message is essentially ultimately what I want—for now—but the problem of course is the link color. However, with your solution, it's only letting me get one link inside the markup for some reason. If I try to link to my talk page or contributions, only my username link will be inside of background. My code now is
<span style="color: white; background-color: purple; border: 1px solid black; padding: 2px;">[[User:Amaury|Amaury]] <small>([[User talk:Amaury|Talk Page]]) • ([[Special:Contributions/Amaury|Contributions]])</small></span>. Amaury (Talk Page) • (Contributions) 23:30, 7 June 2019 (UTC)- @Amaury: <span style="background:purple">[[User:Amaury|<span style="color:white">Amaury</span>]] [[User talk:Amaury|<span style="color:white">(Talk)</span>]] <span style="color:white;">•</span>[[Special:Contributions/Amaury|<span style="color:white">(Contributions)]]|</span></span> yields Amaury (Talk)•(Contributions). I must admit, I'm not great at the mark up, I just modified a sig I saw at WP:Signature tutorial :) Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 01:20, 8 June 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks. Test. (I also wonder if there's a way to make the hover underline match what the text is instead of being the default link blue.) The signature to this message is essentially ultimately what I want—for now—but the problem of course is the link color. However, with your solution, it's only letting me get one link inside the markup for some reason. If I try to link to my talk page or contributions, only my username link will be inside of background. My code now is
Signing sockpuppet talk pages?
Hi there. I just noticed in my watchlist that you've dropped your signature on new talk pages for a handful of checkuser-confirmed sockpuppet accounts ([1], [2], [3]) which are all accounts of the same sockmaster. As an SPI clerk I found it suspicious and I was about to open an investigation, but you've been around here forever, so maybe I can just ask what you're up to? Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 16:25, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Ivanvector: Hello. Sure. I saw some spam from an IP address and upon further inspection, noticed the link had been fairly heavily spammed. I noticed that some accounts were already blocked, but really didn't pay much attention to them being socks. I'm guessing the spam and socks are related. But, as to the links, I was just adding tracking links to accounts' and IPs' talk pages that looked to spam the link so, in the case that it continues, it will be easy to search to see the full extent of it and make a case for blacklisting if need be. If the links interfere with your investigations, feel free to remove them as they really are just for convenience and nothing that I can't gather by going back through my contribs. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 16:50, 13 July 2019 (UTC)
- Makes sense to me, thanks, and no you're not interfering. If you happen to see any accounts that are not blocked, my gut says they're probably also socks. If it's easy for you to compile a list I can take a look. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:21, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Ivanvector: Sure, a list is no problem at all. Unfortunately, it may not help too much as most are stale. One was from the end of March, and all the other accounts are from way back in August. I listed the IP, but I honestly think that it is a different person (switched SEO companies or hired a new marketing person) as it just placed embedded links as opposed to the nicely formatted refs that were done previously. Here are all the accounts that I saw adding the link:
- Unblocked accounts
- Nadiya Chauhan (last edit March 27 2019)
- DrTarunT (Last edit Aug 24 2018)
- Maqsood0997 (Last edit Aug 31 2018)
- DrGirdharSingh (Last edit Aug 24 2018)
- IP
- Already blocked as socks
- Unblocked accounts
- I haven't seen the link be added since that day, but I'll keep an eye out for them. Cheers! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:29, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Ivanvector: Sure, a list is no problem at all. Unfortunately, it may not help too much as most are stale. One was from the end of March, and all the other accounts are from way back in August. I listed the IP, but I honestly think that it is a different person (switched SEO companies or hired a new marketing person) as it just placed embedded links as opposed to the nicely formatted refs that were done previously. Here are all the accounts that I saw adding the link:
- Makes sense to me, thanks, and no you're not interfering. If you happen to see any accounts that are not blocked, my gut says they're probably also socks. If it's easy for you to compile a list I can take a look. Ivanvector (Talk/Edits) 19:21, 15 July 2019 (UTC)
Concerning Call Criteria Link
For sure I know that Wikipedia make use of nofollow attribute, that's First. Second, I link I cited is a link to a website which am not affiliated with my any means, Like the link to Vice magazine. So if I was planning to softly promote Call Criteria -which again not affiliated with- I wouldn't cite Vice magazine link too. It's an informative article I read on this website where which I landed on using a Search Query "Burnout Call Center" you can check it yourself, it's on the First page on Google for that term. So I will cite it again, to prove myself right. As Again for the third time, am not softly pushing this website. Thanks in advance — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diaaab (talk • contribs) 12:13, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Diaaab: When nearly all of your edits are to reinsert the same link despite the fact that it has been removed by at least 6 different editors, it starts to appear that you are more interested in inserting the link than building an encyclopedia. Also, just throwing in a reference at the very top or very bottom, often overwriting formatting, doesn't help the matter. The Google result does not matter, but it seems odd that you tried at least 2 different pages from the same site before that one. The Vice link was already used in the article as an inline link actually sourcing content, not just thrown in (though often times spammers do try to use legitimate links to disguise their own). Regardless, the link is not a reliable source and shouldn't be used as one. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 21:46, 17 July 2019 (UTC)
Virtual Assistant External Link
Hello Apparition! Thank you for contacting me and informing me about the external link removal. I actually wanted to add the SEO services as the VA are very much linked to the Search Engine Optimization and Social Media Marketing. As far as that external link was concerned, thank you to let me know that you have removed it. It was basically to guide people what an Amazon SEO expert actually does. I apologize if you seem this edit spam as it was not to create any kinda link but to enhance the horizon of VA services. I'll be careful next time. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sadaf Bilal Ansari (talk • contribs) 12:32, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
- @Sadaf Bilal Ansari: No worries. The types of links we strive for are reliable, third party sources, such as mainstream newspapers or trade magazines, and not links to companies' sites. I'll leave a template on your talk page with a lot of useful links to help you get started on Wikipedia. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 14:18, 20 July 2019 (UTC)
No heading
Ummmmm WHAT? That person is actively stalking me and currently under investigation and you are blocking me? okay. sure. just put my questions back up, im so sick and tired of people questioning my knowledge when its OBVIOUS they are completely out of their league and they need to know they are out of thier league.
- @2600:8807:5000:d9a:785d:21da:5259:385c: If you cannot communicate without the gross personal attacks, then yes, you will end up being blocked. Whatever is going on off-wiki needs to stay off-wiki. Wikipedia does not care about personal knowledge, Wikipedia is based on published, reliable sources. Being "out of their league" is not a valid argument. Try discussing the sources instead of trying to turn a talk page into a trivia game of adult beverages... Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 03:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)
Digital out-of-home
Hi Dear, I am very disappointed with you. I put a very informative data with a link and you remove that. thanks, bro — Preceding unsigned comment added by BGRDebasis (talk • contribs) 13:26, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
- @BGRDebasis: Your link did not support the data you inserted. It was not a reliable source, and it has been spammed a lot on that page. If you want to add data backed by reliable sources, that is great, but adding poor sources is not. If it disappoints you that spam links get removed, then Wikipedia may not be the place for you. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 14:40, 13 September 2019 (UTC)
Removal of my link
Hello,
I seen the removal of the link, I was solely inserting to show people what these breast supplement sites look like as they are being told not to purchase — Preceding unsigned comment added by OrganicEnlargements (talk • contribs) 17:17, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
- @OrganicEnlargement: Thanks, but that is not an appropriate link for articles. See WP:EL for the types of links that are appropriate. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 17:29, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Can you suggest where can I place my link?
Recently I placed my link here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Dynamics
But unfortunately got deleted. So can you suggest where can I place this as external link? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sudhirinoday (talk • contribs) 10:43, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
- @Sudhirinoday: Wikipedia is not a link directory or a venue for advertising. Your link is not appropriate for Wikipedia. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 12:13, 10 October 2019 (UTC)
ArbCom 2019 election voter message
 | Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
Removal of links
Hi, I don't understand the removal of the content I have posted. The page I linked was on a commercial ___domain, but it is not a service page and does not include any CTA or offers. The information there is more valuable to users trying to learn about the topic that the article that makes almost no sense on the "app development" topic. We worked on that source with several other agencies and developers, and I believe that is more reliable than what is published here. Also, you removed a link to the article about VR and healthcare. It was listed as other reading, not in the body of the article, and the article doesn't contain any offerings. I see no reason for this. I also need to mention that other links to commercial sites remained unchanged by you. That's pretty odd. I don't believe that the fact that a commercial company creates the content means it is less valuable simply because of the author. I doubt you looked at the source before removing the link. — Preceding unsigned comment added by DogFilidog (talk • contribs)
- @DogFilidog: Your link is not a reliable, third party source. Commercial sites try to add pages like that constantly. Additionally, if you are affiliated with the site, you should not be adding the link yourself as you have a conflict of interest. You must disclose your paid editing per WP:PAID. It is against our TOU not to do so. It is actually not odd at all that there are other poor sources in articles. There are more people trying to add their own commercial links than Wikipedia has removing them. We do our best to keep articles clean of spam, but it is very difficult. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 18:19, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Removing a key note in this case
Hello I've noticed you were the last person who edited this article and erased the main part of the article about a podcast that is for relish Rudd. The relisha Rudd podcast was added because it is a key piece to relisha Rudd case. This podcast made the news and world news being on America tonight as well as in the Washington Post. Keith Warren now Keith Davis deserves to be apart of the talk of this young girls case. He created the podcast to help find her and after the media stopped talking about her he still does a podcast show on her will after four years and you erased the info that was done on the podcast show. Readers deserve to know that the case is still being talked about and where things originated such as the iamrelisharudd movement to relisha law and relisha Rudd day so please explain to me why you deleted it. Krusifixdavis (talk) 20:50, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Krusifixdavis: The content needs to be sourced for a conversation to even begin about it. However, we are not going to use an article about the disappearance of a little girl to blatantly promote a person uninvolved in the case. There is no reason "our unsung hero" should have his career plans included in this article. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 21:08, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Podcast adding
First your wrong He is a key part of this case and it should be known if you're going to sit there and allow the Steve wilkos show incident on there which was a circus show you should have real stuff on there that podcast is a key part of this case it is also evidence. One of the episodes has all of relisha family spilling it truth about a lot of things that police are looking into. People were thrilled to see the Picasso mentioned on here not they're furious and if you don't believe me check out the rrtf page on Facebook dude just let it be there relisha deserves this that little girl deserves at least that much and if you don't think so then dude you really have no soul Krusifixdavis (talk) 01:06, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Krusifixdavis: If you want to remove the Steve Wilkos section, I have no objection. If you want to post on the article talk page to get other opinions, that is fine, too. However, you are the one trying to post a biography of a "Professional and Backyard Wrestl(er)" who is on dialysis and wants to be mayor into the article about her disappearance. WTF does all that have anything to do with her disappearance? Frankly, if I were the guy and saw myself being promoted in the article like that, I would be furious and wouldn't be able to sleep until it was removed because I do have a soul. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 01:20, 10 December 2019 (UTC)
Merry Christmas 2019!
Amaury • 18:47, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Amaury: And a merry Christmas to you, old friend! Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 20:22, 25 December 2019 (UTC)
I need to post content on wikipedia
Hi I need to update some content on Wikipedia like I want to make my company page, so I need help how should I do? I will be waiting for your response!!! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Arun Kumardk8 (talk • contribs) 11:16, 27 December 2019 (UTC)
- @Arun Kumardk8: The best answer is you shouldn't as you have a conflict of interest. Wikipedia is not an avenue for advertising, and you would not be able to control the content found on the page. Creating an article is one of the hardest things to do when you are new to Wikipedia, even without a conflict of interest. You will need multiple reliable, third party sources in order to satisfy WP:N and must write from a neutral point of view. However, if you still plan on trying, you will first need to read and comply with WP:PAID. Please note that it is a violation of the Terms of Use not to disclose your relationship with the company. Next, you should read WP:FIRST to understand how to create you first article. Finally, you would need to use Articles for creation to make your article and, when done, wait for an AFC reviewer to either accept or decline the article. Apparition11 Complaints/Mistakes 14:34, 27 December 2019 (UTC)