The verifiability of Wikipedia should not be a victim of my sockpuppeteering.
Hoi Dirk, I see that after another user [https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3ABeetstra&type=revision&diff=793550169&oldid=793481379
had accused me of being a spammer] during my Sock Puppet Investigation that you believed them on their face value and started removing Primaltrek from various wikis such as here, here, and here. As you may or may not have noticed most instances of Primaltrek were as references, some of those placed years before I even wrote a single Asian numismatic article. Primaltrek is not a spam site for various reasons, 1) it’s not ad supported and doesn't gain anything from incoming traffic, 2) it doesn't sell anything or list people that sell anything, 3) unlike Wikipedia it never asks donations from its readers, 4) like Wikipedia it lists inline citations (well, at the “blog” part) to various books and other sources and these citations would be preferable if they weren’t in Mandarin so it would be more beneficial to the readers to include both the English Primaltrek and a Chinese source (as not everyone can read Mandarin making the content harder to verify). 5) the website itself is purely educational and is probably the most reputable online (English language) source on the monetary histories of China and Korea, not being able to use this as a source seriously handicaps many of those articles.
For comparison’s sake if one would look at en:Windows 10 version history one could see the primary (thus a conflict of interest) source quoted numerous times excessively, or at any Apple-related article find the AOL operated TechChrunch or Engadget (both ad supported by paid writers) used hundreds of times. And another comparison would be with a book by David Hartill (which I had bought specifically to expand and create Chinese numismatic articles for Wikipedia) which I had used to an even larger amount, in fact on my user page at Wikimedia Commons I had specifically explained why I used Primaltrek, how I used it and that at al times I would look for alternative sources so no article by itself would be “dependent” on Primaltrek. Of course nobody read that and just assumed that I'm here to spam some non-ad supported educational website. 😒
Why Primal Trek wouldn't benefit from being on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia has a nofollow HTML policy which wouldn't benefit Primaltrek, in fact being on Wikipedia would be detrimental to the website as it would now have to compete with Wikipedia as both now host the same information and Wikipedia generally tends to top Google results. I could even argue that prohibiting Primaltrek is more beneficial to Primaltrek than to Wikipedia because material that is now unsourced can be removed forcing those looking for the information back to Primaltrek.
And again, even if people would click on the links all they would get is a website with SLIGHTLY more detailed information (in some cases, as I worked really hard to find other informational sources that lists things that Primaltrek doesn't have which I also explained on my Commons user page at “the Beauty of Wikipedia”), and the ONLY real advantage Primaltrek currently has is that it hosts images of the coins it discusses (which Commons barely does) and to that end I even e-mailed Mr. Gary Ashkenazy if he could upload his images to Wikimedia Commons a few months ago. All I can see here is that because I had insulted another user you thought that the best way to punish me is by also punishing the readers and the verifiability of Wikipedia itself, this seems like a completely unrelated and unfounded way of punishing people and harming encyclopedic content to punish people is the opposite of why anyone should be here at Wikipedia.
A final disclaimer regarding this issue.
Ik heb nooit geld of wat voor compensatie ooit voor welke van mijn bewerkingen dan ook gekregen, ik verwacht hier nooit geld of een andere compensatie voor te krijgen en alle en elke bewerking dat ik in “de mainspace” deed was voor geen enkele reden anders dan leerzame inhoud voor de lezers te maken. Daarom verzoek ik u vriendelijk op Primaltrek van de globale blacklist te halen en alle schade hierdoor ongedaan te maken.
- As the first report states, you were using sockpuppets, and those sock puppets are clearly linked to the website. That would mean that you are linked to the website, and that is reconfirmed here.
- You totally misunderstand our conflict of interest policy, it has nothing to do with a subject of a page and the links on said page. COI is linked to a person, and the material they are adding to Wikipedia.
- You totally misunderstand our policies of spam, they have often nothing to do with wht is linked to, it is linked to how (and by who) these links are added.
- And you completely misunderstand spamming - why if spammers/editors with a clear COI (like you) do not have any benefit, why do they keep spamming Wikipedia. Altruism?
- You will not be allowed to edit after your extensive sock puppetry. If uninvolved editors find need for the link, we will hear from them. —Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:42, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- What spam if I may ask and what conflict of interest? I am in no way connected to the website nor did I add the spam with sockouppets (I clearly stated on my user page that I mostly edit signed off and that I was the IPs editing those articles), how did I spam a link? Different references from various websites were also used to a lesser extent, did I spam a book too? As I had used David Hartill more often Primaltrek.
- Please tell me what COI I have concerning Prinaltrek as I didn't seem to fins any in Wikipedia:COI. --2405:4800:1484:9937:987B:8124:7E28:1B6D 14:11, 18 August 2017 (UTC) (Donald Trung)
- Also in no way am I linked to any website, I am currently employed as an English teacher and I own a restaurant that my wife operates. I have never been paid by any website for anything nor do I have an interest in receiving any money from any website, I sincerely doubt that you understand the COI policy. --2405:4800:1484:9937:987B:8124:7E28:1B6D 14:17, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- And ro answer your question, adding educational content is altruism, I personally have no benefit from it but those interested in reading the subject (you know, the people you should be here for) do, and I have no idea id you even saw my sockpuppetry case but it all concerned about insulting an editor, not a single sock puppet account I have created linked any website. So please tell me how I am paid by an evil educational website to make sure no one has to go to their website to find information on the subject of their expertise. --2405:4800:1484:9937:987B:8124:7E28:1B6D 14:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- And since you globally banned it, did you even look at where you removed it from? On Serbian Wikipedia in one instance you removed it from someone's user space (not me), or are you to claim that that person too is somehow connected to Primaltrek? --2405:4800:1484:9937:987B:8124:7E28:1B6D 14:31, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- You signed above with 'Donald Trung' .. that account was one of the editors adding it, and there were more sockpuppets that added the link.
- If non-involved editors come to discuss the link, we will consider it. If the owners of primaltrek will come to complain, I will point them to the sockpuppetcase that caused this.
- Yes, I removed it everywhere (not that much was left, most of it was already removed), it is blacklisted, leaving it there will result in problems at some point. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 15:43, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- The sockpuppet case was about me insulting another user, o account I made added the link, and for the record as you removed it here, I am not Neboysha87. I genuinely wonder if you know what a COI is, and if so then please explain my COI. Years ago I also added ZDNet ten times in one day and I have used that link probably 50 times, I could just as well claim that the Universitair Medisch Centrum Groningen pays me every time I say "gezindheid" or Santa Claus when I say "Merry Christmas". I doubt that you have even looked at the case as I had stopped adding Primaltrek to the enwiki around mid-July. --2405:4800:1484:9937:987B:8124:7E28:1B6D 20:36, 18 August 2017 (UTC)
- We've been ignoring that for too long .. the list is too long, takes too long to sort and hence time outs on different parts - main bot procedure thinks things are hanging and kills the process. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:52, 19 December 2017 (UTC)
Hi. mw: is being for some time getting targeted by spambots. If not already, could it be possible to monitor its local (black|whitelists) and IRC feed? Thanks! —MarcoAurelio (talk) 10:45, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
- @MarcoAurelio: not sure if it is, I will check when I have access to putty. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 12:11, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
COIBot significant backlog ...
- Hmm, there were only 2 running (should be 6). I've added 4, will take some time to catch up .. --Dirk Beetstra T C (en: U, T) 13:22, 15 February 2018 (UTC)