Brugerdiskussion:Billinghurst: Forskelle mellem versioner

← Gå til forrige forskel Gå til næste forskel →

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Versionen fra 14. jul. 2020, 16:03

m:user talk:billinghurst
Denne side er en blød omdirigering.

Fjernelse af link Growshop

Vil du være venlig at tage diskutionen op på selve siden omkring linket du har fjernet, emnet er oprettet. Eller i det mindste give mig en forklaring hvorfor der ikke må forefindes et eksempel, som der jo gør på mange wiki artikler, både danske og internationale.

Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, not a link farm. We would generally do not want to add links to commercial companies in external links just because they have some relevance. Adding a link has to add value to the article, and your links to that commercial company do not add value, they simply preferentially advertise. Billinghurst 20. dec 2011, 15:26 (CET)

Tilbagerulning af Au Pair dansk side

Jeg ved ikke lige hvordan jeg kunne svare dig på din besked, derfor skriver jeg det her. Mener du at det er det bedre at have misinformationer og "broken links" end at have link til de relevante informationer som kan hjælpe andre der søger up-to-date oplysninger om au pair emnet? Jeg mener at linket indeholder yderligere oplysninger, som er præcise og behandler emnet! Præsis som det er beskrevet i Wikipedia regler: https://da.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Eksterne_henvisninger

Hvis hvis nedenstående links er tilladt, selvom de ikke er opdaterede, så kan jeg ikke se grunden hvorfor min side med opdateret info må ikke være oplyst! www.aupair.com, greataupair.com, aupairworld.com Miokatu

@Miokatu: It is never better to have spam / unreliable commercial links and what appears to be an undeclared conflict of interest or paid editing. Please read the local direction about fixing dead links, it is NOT how you are undertaking your edits. If you need assistance, then please ask at Wikipedia:Landsbybrønden. Billinghurst (diskussion) 11. jul 2020, 09:57 (CEST)

@Billinghurst: Who decides what type of link it is? Are these: aupair.com, greataupair.com, aupairworld.com - reliable to be listed on wiki? Why no one removes them? Miokatu

I would have said that none of them are reliable, especially in the hands of someone with a conflict of interest; read Hjælp:Kilder/Pålidelige kilder. Talk to the community at Wikipedia:Landsbybrønden Billinghurst (diskussion) 14. jul 2020, 00:16 (CEST)

@Billinghurst: Yet still you don't remove those for some reason! In the Hjælp:Kilder/Pålidelige kilder it says: Eksempler på kilder som ikke er egnede: Ugeblade, Private hjemmesider, blogs, osv, hvor forfatteren og vedkommendes faglige baggrund er ukendt. So I was right when I deleted 404 link to a newspaper article, but you revert my changes (specifying that I may not delete the links I deleted), on what purpose? Please explain your decision of making choice of what unreliable sources may be published (even they are dead) and what may not! Miokatu

@@ Linje 14: / Linje 14: @@
 Hvis hvis nedenstående links er tilladt, selvom de ikke er opdaterede, så kan jeg ikke se grunden hvorfor min side med opdateret info må ikke være oplyst!
 www.aupair.com, greataupair.com, aupairworld.com
-{{unsigned|Miokatu}}
+[[Bruger:Miokatu|Miokatu]]
 :{{ping|Miokatu}} It is never better to have spam / unreliable commercial links and what appears to be an undeclared conflict of interest or paid editing. Please read the local direction about fixing [[Wikipedia:Artikler med døde eksterne henvisninger|dead links]], it is NOT how you are undertaking your edits. If you need assistance, then please ask at [[Wikipedia:Landsbybrønden]]. [[Bruger:Billinghurst|Billinghurst]] ([[Brugerdiskussion:Billinghurst|diskussion]]) 11. jul 2020, 09:57 (CEST)
-:{{ping|Billinghurst}} Who decides what type of link it is? Are these: aupair.com, greataupair.com, aupairworld.com - reliable to be listed on wiki? Why no one removes them? {{unsigned|128.76.136.162}}
+:{{ping|Billinghurst}} Who decides what type of link it is? Are these: aupair.com, greataupair.com, aupairworld.com - reliable to be listed on wiki? Why no one removes them? [[Bruger:Miokatu|Miokatu]]
 ::I would have said that none of them are reliable, especially in the hands of someone with a conflict of interest; read [[Hjælp:Kilder/Pålidelige kilder]]. Talk to the community at [[Wikipedia:Landsbybrønden]] [[Bruger:Billinghurst|Billinghurst]] ([[Brugerdiskussion:Billinghurst|diskussion]]) 14. jul 2020, 00:16 (CEST)
+:::{{ping|Billinghurst}} Yet still you don't remove those for some reason! In the [[Hjælp:Kilder/Pålidelige kilder]] it says: ''Eksempler på kilder som ikke er egnede: Ugeblade, Private hjemmesider, blogs, osv, hvor forfatteren og vedkommendes faglige baggrund er ukendt.'' So I was right when I deleted 404 link to a newspaper article, but you revert my changes (specifying that I may not delete the links I deleted), on what purpose? Please explain your decision of making choice of what unreliable sources may be published (even they are dead) and what may not! [[Bruger:Miokatu|Miokatu]]