User talk:Julianoddy

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 article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Danmuz (talk) 22:49, 7 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Danmuz, doollee.com is a not for profit site adding considerably to information on Wiki. How do I go about demonstrating this so the putative links are restored. JulianJulianoddy (talk) 12:58, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Julian, to the best of my knowledge links to doollee.com does not meet the requirements for external links (hence my removal), even though the site may be a quality site. However, others may see differently, so my suggestion is that you request a discussion of the link/site on Wikipedia:ELN. If a consensus is reached there to allow the links, I will be happy to restore all the links (or you can just add them again yourself, whichever you prefer). Kind regards, --Danmuz (talk) 15:09, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Danmuz, thank you for taking the trouble to reply – even if I am totally bemused by your answer !! Perhaps I could use Norman Corwin as an example. Little or no mention is made of his plays in the Wiki entry, yet doollee.com gives information on seven of them. Wiki has two links to the Internet Movie Database and one to the Internet Broadway Database from http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Norman_Corwin. Both these sites are similar to doollee, except that IMDb is very much a “for profit” site whereas doollee does not even carry any adverts. IBDb provides information purely on Broadway plays – doollee lists 40,000 playwrights and 138,000 of their plays from worldwide productions. A link to doollee enhances the Wiki entry immeasurably – so how does it “not meet the requirements for external links” when these two examples do?. All good things,

JulianJulianoddy (talk) 09:50, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again, Julian. Taking the Norman Corwin example, I do not think the entry in doolee meets the requirements for the following reasons: The biographical content itself does not add any information. That leaves the list of plays: The links to the where to buy is certainly not relevant to Wikipedia, in fact since they are affiliate links it does mean there is some finance involved as well, however little (I'm not accusing you of being in it for the money! I see no reason to believe it's not a non-profit/con amore project, but the links are not increasing the proposition from the Wikipedia point of view). That leaves the miscellaneous information (such as a synopsis, etc.) and I don't think that is enough. It would have to be very extensive information to be that. But as I said: that is my view as an editor. Others may see it differently so I will again suggest you request a discussion about the topic on Wikipedia:ELN, as your site is not a spam site there is a chance it will be allowed. Regarding the other links (IBDb, etc); to me it looks like some of the links on the Norman Corwin article (and other articles of that kind) perhaps should be removed as well, but it should probably be discussed first so a consensus amongst editors can be reached since the links have been on the pages for a long time (several years). Regards, --Danmuz (talk) 11:43, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK. I am sorry to be stupid but could you explain, very simply!, as to how I start a discussion on Wikipedia:ELN. I am sure it is easy I just can't see how to do it. thanks, JulianJulianoddy (talk) 12:12, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

That's not at all stupid, in fact the way to create a new discussion could be better explained. Anyhow, in the section on that page called "Reporting Form", enter a title (for example: "doollee.com") where it says: "Enter the section header in the space below:". Then click Create Report. Next write why you think doollee should be allowed as an external link on Writer-articles on Wikipedia. You should also include a link to this discussion. Kind regards, --Danmuz (talk) 13:23, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links/Noticeboard#www.doollee.com_-_The_Playwrights.27_Database, Julian Julianoddy (talk) 13:49, 9 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Danuz, I appreciate I am banging my head against a brick wall so I give up !! It was naive of me to think that a free not for profit hobby website (commision from bookstores does not cover my running costs), like www.doollee.com, run by one person could compete for Wiki's attention against such pay wall giants, like Amazon's Internet Movie Database. I copy my final entry from Wikipedia:ELN:
www.doollee.com - The Playwrights' Database.

As the owner of www.doollee.com I have had a constructive dialogue with Danmuz at to why he considers external links to doollee.com should not be allowed. http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/User_talk:Julianoddy.

This will mean that all links will be removed including long-standing ones such as the one on http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Paul_Ableman which links to doollee's information on nineteen of Ableman's plays (rather than the three shown on Wiki.

Obviously I shall be happy to respond to any comments/queries and hope to get Danmuz to reconsider his position. JulianJulianoddy (talk) 13:46, 9 April 2012 (UTC) Welcome to Wikipedia. As you have discovered, it's an unfortunately complicated place, so congratulations on figuring out this much. Let me suggest that you read WP:External links, which lists typical reasons for both accepting and rejecting links, and then tell us how you think the links to doollee.com compare to the criteria there. If it's easier, then you can pick one article as an example, rather than talking in generalities. WhatamIdoing (talk) 16:36, 9 April 2012 (UTC) To give one example http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Matt_Charman gives no information on plays. A link to http://www.doollee.com/PlaywrightsC/charman-matt.html would be helpful and informative.Julianoddy (talk) 13:52, 17 April 2012 (UTC)Julianoddy (talk) 14:03, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Julian, I see no reason to give up now. You have now replied on the WP:ELN, now allow some time for others to weigh in. No single person decides here on Wikipedia, it's all based on consensus between editors. As I said, I may see things one way but others may see differently (and in your case it's not 100% clear, if I thought your site was a spam site or otherwise useless I would not have advised you to take it to WP:ELN. I did that because I believe your site does not meet requirements but I'm not 100% certain, and it deserves to have a fair chance of a second opinion), and I will certainly respect a consensus either way. Even if your links are not approved in the end, you may get some feedback on things to change so that it may be included in Wikipedia articles. It's all about content, not about money, and if your content is deemed of enough value to the article then it will be allowed. Don't despair. Danmuz (talk) 15:06, 17 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2012

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Graham Linehan. 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.

You have added links to your website to many, many articles. Not only that, in most cases, you have done it wrong, corrupting the formatting of the articles. Do not add any more links to any articles without first discussing any possible value of the link on each Talk page of each article you want to add the link. Unless you get a consensus for the addition in advance, you can't add it.--Bbb23 (talk) 14:17, 28 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]