User talk:Sgornick: Difference between revisions

From Bitcoin Wiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Sgornick (talk | contribs)
Add response to Vladgiurgiubv.
Sgornick (talk | contribs)
Line 9: Line 9:
--[[User:Vladgiurgiubv|Vladgiurgiubv]] 13:13, 10 August 2011 (GMT)
--[[User:Vladgiurgiubv|Vladgiurgiubv]] 13:13, 10 August 2011 (GMT)


Vladgiurgiubv, It was an unwritten but generally accepted rule that no affiliate / referral links should be included in the wiki for a number of reasons.  The [[BitcoinWiki:Rules|[policy]] does now exist though.
Vladgiurgiubv, It was an unwritten but generally accepted rule that no affiliate / referral links should be included in the wiki for a number of reasons.  The [[BitcoinWiki:Rules|policy]] does now exist though.

Revision as of 21:16, 10 August 2011

06:22, 4 August 2011 (GMT)

Trade‎; 05:20 . . (-71) . . Sgornick (Talk | contribs)‎ (→Getting started:  Remove BTCBase, this is wiki is generally for english-only sites. There are separate wikis for other languages.)

Yet Bitomat is not available in English... what's the difference here? --Luke-jr 06:22, 4 August 2011 (GMT)

Good point, Luke-jr. Unfortunately, they don't belong on the trade page for another reason -- they are info only, they have no trade. Otherwise I would add them back in somewhere.

13:13, 10 August 2011 (GMT)

Mr. Sgornick I thought this was a good idea. I don't understand how it hurts the community?!(I don't see the reasons in deleting them.) I made my contributions (Introduced 4-5 bitcoin-related sites and wrote some descriptions). The users don't have anything to loose and the BTC I make out of this I intend to spend on bitcoindeals.com (after I get an invitation). Isn't there a way I can leave those links there? We have the same rights on this wiki so I hope we can disscus this with respect and consideration. --Vladgiurgiubv 13:13, 10 August 2011 (GMT)

Vladgiurgiubv, It was an unwritten but generally accepted rule that no affiliate / referral links should be included in the wiki for a number of reasons. The policy does now exist though.