October 2009 edit

It is sad to see the useful external link that I added to Wikipedia articles removed in wholesale fashion because it is percieved to be spam or inapropriate without due consideration. Triplestop needs to reconsider their edits because they have, in this case, "thrown the baby out with the bath water." The [[1]] and [[2]] links provide users with free access to advanced unit conversion and expression evaluation tools. These links should be reinstated. MikeVanVoorhis (talk) 16:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC) Reply

(I apologize for taking so long to get back to this post) The Conversion of units article contains an external link to a site containing numerous other external links. I feel that this link is too difficult for users to use because it adds another level of access before usable conversions are performed. I will add the http://AnalysisChamp.com/EEx/ExpEvalCV.asp link to the external link and see if it is utilized at that level.

 MikeVanVoorhis (talk) 15:23, 31 August 2011 (UTC)Reply

analysischamp.com: Linksearch en (insource) - meta - de - fr - simple - wikt:en - wikt:frSpamcheckMER-C X-wikigs • Reports: Links on en - COIBot - COIBot-Local • Discussions: tracked - advanced - RSN • COIBot-Link, Local, & XWiki Reports - Wikipedia: en - fr - de • Google: searchmeta • Domain: domaintoolsAboutUs.com

  Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Triplestop x3 02:10, 14 October 2009 (UTC)Reply