User talk:Mikevegas40

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising in articles. For more information on this, see

• Policy on neutral point of view
• Guideline on spam
• Guideline on external links
• Guideline on conflict of interest

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 23:51, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. We invite everyone to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, the external links you added to the page Fairbanks, Alaska do not comply with our guidelines for external links. 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. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 00:02, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I like the charts, but do have one critique. Possibly change the colors to not be so bright? As is, the charts are a bit too intense and clash with the color scheme of the rest of the page. Thanks! Ancjr 05:38, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I will make changes.

Thanks! I might suggest the chart from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoenix%2C_Arizona#Climate as a starting point. And, thanks for your addition to the article. Ancjr 05:47, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think of the colors I used on Paducah?

Much better! As a pointer for using talk pages, dont forget the colons before each talk comment, and to sign your comments using 4 tildes: ~~~~. See Wikipedia:Tutorial_(Talk_pages) for more details. Welcome to Wikipedia and don't hesitate to contact me if you have any questions about anything. Ancjr 06:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I wonder, could these climate charts be set up as some sort of a template? If we could do that, the articles would be easier to edit (those charts are lengthy when you see the code) and the charts would be easier to update. For that matter, are there any similar climate templates already out there? I'm not sure...I've never come across any that I can rememeber. --MatthewUND^(talk) 21:08, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know of any templates for these chart, or any other climate charts, but I will look into making one when I can get to it, maybe this week. Mikevegas40 21:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since we get a lot of questions about climate in Alaska, they really add a lot to our pages. Thanks very much, great work! --Yksin 16:38, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I see you are hard at work fixing climate links. Thank you! You may want to also look at User:DeadLinkBOT and User:MerlLinkBot which may be able to cut down the work. I am not sure just how many of those links there could be. ZabMilenko 12:11, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like they prefer your old dead links over your new working links. This is a fiasco but I believe you were in the right. Hope the actions of the editors (who obviously did little research) don't discourage you from contributing to WikiPedia in the future. ZabMilenko 20:46, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how anyone would think adding a spam link to roughly 175 articles is "in the right". And to say editors did "little research" is way out of line. It took research to figure out the web site he was adding, was owned by him - a web site made to generate money for him via the Google pay-per-click advertising. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 22:57, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It is obvious that most of the responses to the incident were done not out of research, but out of reading the original complaint and glancing at contribution lists. See how it goes from whether his links are valid to whether or not he agrees with GFDL? then to whether Weather.com is better than NOAA? Neither address the problem of the old link versus the new link. Finally someone with a clue (Jehochman (talk · contribs)) says what needed to be said, but instead of finding a consensus somewhere the reverts just start pouring in with accusations of spammer and vandal. THAT is out of line and totally assuming bad faith. ZabMilenko 23:50, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So are the links spam or is the content spam? The links properly point to the source that organized the data, so either the tables need to be taken down or the links need to go up. Broken links to an abandoned site aren't of any use, and claiiming that the data came from weather.com or any other commercial source is a lie. A case can be made for linking to NOAA, now who is going to dig through their ponderous data sources for the proper link? These tables have been on Wikipedia for over 2 years, and you can see that it was me who put them up. In those two years there has not been any complaint about their accuracy.--Mikevegas40 (talk) 00:37, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I imagine Mike, that no one has questioned them before because they never really looked at where the actual reference went to. The only reason I noticed it was because you removed the weather.com link at Jackson, Mississippi claiming it to be a dead link, which it wasn't. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 03:46, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That was a mistake. I had googled source:ustravelweather.com in order to find the wiki pages that contained links to ustravelweather.com. I guess that google had an old page, because the Jackson page was in the results. I was hurrying, trying to get through all of the pages, and didn't pay close enough attention.--Mikevegas40 (talk) 04:19, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have an issue with it but my personal feelings are now involved, so I cannot make a neutral opinion on it anymore. I started a discussion at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cities#Climate_Table_Links that you may wish to add your comments to. However it turns out I appreciate your efforts. ZabMilenko 00:52, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please be careful with the links. Not all of the links you are replacing are dead links. For example, the link you replaced at Jackson, Mississippi is not dead. I think the ustravelweather.com links may be dead but the Jackson article uses a weather.com link and it was/is working fine. - ALLST✰R▼^echo _{wuz here @} 13:04, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Toddst1 (talk) 13:32, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The discussion is about the topic Wikipedia:Ani#Delicate_issue. Thank you. Toddst1 (talk) 13:34, 29 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Do not blank the climate data. If discussion results in the community deciding that the source is invalid, then the correct course of action is to update to an appropriate source, not delete the tables. Continuing to blank the tables would be a form of disruption, and could be viewed as vandalism or at the least as being pointy edits. Please join the discussion rather than blanking content. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 01:35, 30 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Im just checking. I dont think there's any great opposition to you continuing to update the climate tables if there's any of them left to do. Soap ^Talk/_{Contributions} 19:14, 17 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:06, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mikevegas40. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mikevegas40. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mikevegas40. Voting in the 2018 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 3 December. All users who registered an account before Sunday, 28 October 2018, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Thursday, 1 November 2018 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2018 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 19 November 2018 (UTC)[reply]