User talk:Lordofthings

September 2007

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added to the page Panama do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then 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 to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Nposs 13:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just noticed this. I must say that the Wikipedia form of talk is rather old fashioned when actually email or a real forum would be more constructive.

Anyway now that I finally get hold of you I get to know why my link suddenly disappears. You mentioned that the non-profit comment was eliminated when actually the whole link to PanamaSights.com was removed.

Now, I think this is unfair because PanamaSights.com has been on my own expense (originally a personal site) for 13 years. Sure it has/had some banners and Google AdSense because nothing is free, hosting and development have to be paid. Wikipedia asks for donation, why can't I have something to cover the expenses of bringing this useful information to the users?

Then, my link is eliminated because of the banners. Yet when you look at the other links the in the page they are full of banners and sponsors. Even worse, just take a look at one of the links that never disappears (I wonder why): Panama1.com, they actually make a lot of profit (http://www.panama1.com/anunciar.php). So, why they can have banners and advertise and be kept in the list while my site cannot? I believe this is unfair. So if the rule is to apply then Panama1.com, PanamaGuide.com and PanamaNews.com must also go away. Fair is fair, Panama no longer has a dictatorship.

If you wish a prompt response I urge you to use the http://www.panamasights.com/ContactUs.aspx page because if I put my email address here I will be spammed. I certainly hope we can resolve this issue in a fair manner rather than the way it has been handled up to now.

There is a misunderstanding. The link was not removed because it is ad-supported. Please see the discussion on the talk page of the article for an explanation. Adding a link to your own site is a conflict of interest: WP:COI. Repeatedly adding links to your own sight is considered a form of spamming (even when done with the best of intentions). Nposs 13:07, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK conflict of interest. But can you then explain to me WHY it is not a conflict of interest to have the other three sites listed there when they actually have much more advertising than my page? in fact my only "income" is AdSense, the banners shown there are to this moment free, yet if you ask the other sites they charge a LOT of money for advertising with them.

So, I have no problem removing my link from there but ONLY on the basis of fair treatment which I suppose you are a reasonable person and would agree that the other sites listed there (PanamaGuide, PanamaNews,Panama1) exhibit the same "conflict of interest". I suppose you are not associated with them. I await your response, I monitor the page every now and then. Lordofthings 13:26, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right about PanamaGuide and Panama1. They are directory websites (discouraged under WP:EL). Again, it has less to do with their ad-supported nature than how their content fits under the external link guidelines. PanamaNews appears to be a nation online newspaper. That seems like an appropriate link, but I may not have enough knowledge to judge it appropriately. Nposs 13:34, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PanamaGuide is not a national newspaper. If you want to list national newspapers (I am Panamanian, I know my country and that is why I started my page about Panama even before wikipedia existed). The newspapers are: La Prensa, El Siglo, El Panama America, La Estrella de Panama and La Critica. Neither PanamaGuide nor PanamaNews are newspapers of Panama and they are REALLY involved in making a business out of it. Panama1 also has relevant information (and mine does as well so there is no difference there) all in all between mine and Panama1 we both serve the same purpose: to help tourists so if mine goes then why does the other one not? that is my point.

External links, adsense, and conflict of interest

You have repeatedly linked to two websites: virtual-aviation.info and panamasights.com (and a link that resolves to that domain). These two websites share a Google adsense account: pub-3050777595580571. That is to say, although they cover different subjects, they generation ad revenue for the same person. Understand that adding links to websites with which you are affiliated is considered a conflict of interest and is strongly discouarged: WP:COI. Continuing to add these links will likely be viewed as a form of spamming. I encourage you to reconsider your pattern of editing. Nposs 13:00, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to be fair I encourage you to visit all the sites shown on the External Links: panama-guide.com (owner is known for spamming and activism according to what the Panama wiki page shows in the history), ThePanamaNews.com shows an outrageous amount of adverts on their main page, many of which are not even related to Panama. Panama1.com has a considerable amount of adverts and I already pointed you to their "advertise here" page. Why is that NOT conflict of interest? If that is the policy then the whole external links section should be eliminated and keep only links to government sites. Don't even know about "MEdia", for example the Prensa newspaper listed there does have adverts on their page and charge around $250/month for an advert on their site. I believe that if you are a reasonable person you would agree with me, I am not looking for a "fight" but I certainly vow for FAIR treatment. I shall also proceed to remove my links back to Wikipedia.