User talk:Toylandgrrrl

February 2008

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added to the page Dame Darcy 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 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, 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.  

Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. If you were trying to insert a good link, please accept my creator's apologies, but note that the external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia.

The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): rule: '\bmyspace\.com' (link(s): http://www.myspace.com/damedarcydeathbydoll) . If the external link you inserted or changed was to a blog, forum, free web hosting service, or similar site, then please check the information on the external site thorougly. Note that such sites should probably not be linked to if they contain information that is in violation of the creators copyright (see Linking to copyrighted works), or they are not written by a recognised, reliable source. Linking to sites that you are involved with is also strongly discouraged (see conflict of interest).

Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! XLinkBot (talk) 00:12, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Dame Darcy

There's a policy on Wikipedia regarding the use of profiles etc. for biographies of living persons here, however if the living person manages the blog/person website themselves then there are exceptions - see the policy on using the subject as a source. In all honesty I would stay away from using MySpace as a source. If the subject has a blog that is maintained by themselves then you could use that. It's much better to include third-party independent references, though. Thanks. SMC (talk) 00:04, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

I just found this essay on reliable sources, which is more or less what I was looking for. The community generally frowns upon using networking media such as IRC (Internet Relay Chat), MySpace and YouTube as sources, simply because there's no way of verifying who wrote what. For all other editors know (and I'm sure this isn't the case) you could be looking to introduce some form of libelous material to an article and back it up using a MySpace profile, claiming that the profile is run by the person in question. There's simply no way of other editors knowing how genuine the source is. The only real exception is for blogs run by the person themselves, so it may be worth looking into that as an option. Really, the guidelines regarding social networking sites are for the protection of everyone involved (the people/organisation, the editors, and Wikipedia). SMC (talk) 00:22, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

No worries! If you need any more help or explanation, please don't hesitate to ask on my talk page. SMC (talk) 00:26, 1 March 2008 (UTC)