User talk:Umfspock87
December 2011
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, please do not add promotional material to articles or other Wikipedia pages, as you did to Penobscot Expedition. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. ... and many other articles. Please beware of WP:COI. Glrx (talk) 20:04, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
- I disagree that my addition to the suggested reading section of the Penobscot Expedition was of a promotional nature. While it is true that I recommended a book about Maine's role in the Revolution that I authored, I feel given the topic of the book it was very appropriate to do so. Heck, the other book mentioned is a novel which, although, very very good, is historical fiction. My work is well researched and sourced and I feel strongly that it would be very useful to anyone wishing to study the Penobscot Expedition in more detail.
- Umfspock87 (talk) 23:21, 24 December 2011 (UTC)umfspock87
- You went on a spree of adding your books as further reading for many articles. You certainly weren't shy here. Glrx (talk) 23:40, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
My "spree" as you call it, began a couple of days ago when I stumbled upon Wikipedia's article on Light Horse Harry Lee. I noticed that it claimed that Lee and his legion fought at the battle of Camden ( which was absolutely not true ). I made my first correction, then got the idea of sharing my research (seven books and counting) to some of the other articles. I agree that in doing so there is an appearance of self promotion, but the bottom line is that I stand by my reasearch and writing and I think others would benefit from my work. Could you please explain the reason for adding my Revlist announcement to your last reply? I'm still trying to figure out if I'm in the proverbial doghouse here. Umfspock87 (talk) 00:00, 25 December 2011 (UTC) umfspock87
- You are not in any doghouse. I encourage you to add and correct content. I have no problem with an author adding content to an article and citing his published work as a source. Generally, for further reading sections are inappropriate and usually serve as a magnet for advertising. Glrx (talk) 18:18, 26 December 2011 (UTC)