Redirect to:
This page is a redirect. The following categories are used to track and monitor this redirect:
|
it refers to the official site. Shortcut WP:BOOKSPAMWP:BOOKSPAM Sometimes Wikipedia sees bookspam, which is the insertion of text mentioning books to call...
Click to read more »the entry itself is spam. eaolson 02:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC) Delete bookspam Ruby 02:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC) Delete as nn per nom.Blnguyen 05:44...
Click to read more »reviews are useless. Leibniz 20:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC) Delete More bookspam. Should be speedied, if it weren't for the previous afd. Article has been...
Click to read more »editors are expected to comply with the Conflicts of interest guideline. Bookspam (the addition of content for the purpose of advertising a work) and other...
Click to read more »is created primarily to promote its creator's work (WP:COI, WP:SPA, WP:BOOKSPAM). The topic is more widely known as social search. Adblock2 (talk) 01:50...
Click to read more »from a Wikipedia editor of good faith who knows Turkish. I removed the bookspam, BTW. Drmies (talk) 14:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC) Drmies I can't find any...
Click to read more »extremely dumb question, but... Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2020 January 2 Bookspam My edits are being deleted! Why? Page Still Under Review | Help Hill, Ric...
Click to read more »was nominated as a result of WP:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents#Bookspam, which was semi-unrelated to this page itself. Whether this is a POINTy...
Click to read more »WP:BOOKSPAM. (TW) Tag: Undo 11:51, January 15, 2019 diff hist +515 Fort Point, San Francisco Reverted 1 edit by Drmies (talk): Not WP:BOOKSPAM. (TW)...
Click to read more »Legionarius (talk) 02:05, 9 December 2013 (UTC) User:Dutchy85 has added "bookspam" to the lead paragraphs of dozens of articles. The book appears to be self-published...
Click to read more »discussion. I issued a warning to a new user for promoting their book as BookSpam (refspam) and removed their additions but I have an established user that...
Click to read more »continue report to AIV.--Crossmr (talk) 02:04, 8 November 2008 (UTC) Yes, bookspam. Occasionally done by publishers. Try to engage them in positive ways and...
Click to read more »I hope this is the correct place to post (if not, please point me in the right direction). User:Baku Shad-do has been removing sourced content from the...
Click to read more »edits should be made to this discussion. Their contributions are endless bookspam. There's been no response to multiple warnings on talk page. Chris Troutman...
Click to read more »Amazon book pages. Is WP here to promote an author's books? Nope. It is bookspam. The complainant was told twice to make a bibliography section similar...
Click to read more »listed? If it's not a U.S. book, there's no certainty that happens. As for bookspam, I'd agree. The reliability of something not from a reputable publisher...
Click to read more »other editors, UNLESS that particular bookseller begins to show up as WP:BOOKSPAM in other articles. In the general case, a agree with @Trappist the monk:...
Click to read more »written. This has been challenged, and may be in breach of WP:COI, WP:BOOKSPAM WP:CITESPAM and various other guidelines and policies, including WP:NOT...
Click to read more »bad. I'll guess that 1/2 is good, 1/4 marginal, and 1/4 is bad. Deleting bookspam and refspam is a good thing; COI editing should be suspect. Sadly, I see...
Click to read more »this? — HelloAnnyong (say whaaat?!) 01:54, 9 November 2009 (UTC) See WP:BOOKSPAM. The question to be asked in that context is not whether Davis' book is...
Click to read more »2021 (UTC) Hi Indiana Author. Please understand that WP:CITESPAM and WP:BOOKSPAM are problems that the Wikipedia Community is dealing with on a daily basis...
Click to read more »from a Wikipedia editor of good faith who knows Turkish. I removed the bookspam, BTW. Drmies (talk) 14:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC) Drmies I can't find any...
Click to read more »is created primarily to promote its creator's work (WP:COI, WP:SPA, WP:BOOKSPAM). The topic is more widely known as social search. Adblock2 (talk) 01:50...
Click to read more »reading" sections of articles that are only vaguely related seems like WP:BOOKSPAM to me. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:49, 1 September 2010 (UTC) Have you read...
Click to read more »was nominated as a result of WP:Administrator's noticeboard/Incidents#Bookspam, which was semi-unrelated to this page itself. Whether this is a POINTy...
Click to read more »otherwise. It is only in a "further reading" list. The whole thing is bookspam, which is just one more reason (not a different reason, but an additional...
Click to read more »including the link. Claims that some bookspam I'm removing is a cited source when it is not (1, 2) (the bookspam in question may be seen in the first...
Click to read more »should happen with the article. Right now it feels like a WP:CITESPAM/WP:BOOKSPAM farm. A few weeks ago, I started verifying/replacing sources and updating...
Click to read more »--♦IanMacM♦ (talk to me) 04:35, 19 March 2013 (UTC) The is pretty obvious WP:BOOKSPAM - the mass addition of links to Springer's articles to the 'Further reading'...
Click to read more »to simple failure to meet WP:RS to accusations of WP:PROMOTION and WP:BOOKSPAM. They start here, carry on here, travel next to here, and then here, and...
Click to read more »automatically unreliable or necessitating removal, by the way. We even have WP:BOOKSPAM issues with off-line sources. Someone not using his real name (talk) 16:04...
Click to read more »SenatorLEVI 10:12, 8 January 2021 (UTC) Would it be considered WP:PROMO or WP:BOOKSPAM to include books related or written by the subject of an article in the...
Click to read more »— Jeraphine Gryphon (talk) 15:47, 15 April 2015 (UTC) That's definitely bookspam as the main purpose is to promote the books, especially when the edits...
Click to read more »video on his personal channel. By now, I think we can safely call this WP:BOOKSPAM and WP:LINKSPAM. I will revert said user's edits. - HyperGaruda (talk)...
Click to read more »I can't help but see your request here as wanting permission to add WP:BOOKSPAM and self promotion to help sell more books. Wikipedia isn't your personal...
Click to read more »the entry itself is spam. eaolson 02:26, 10 February 2006 (UTC) Delete bookspam Ruby 02:34, 10 February 2006 (UTC) Delete as nn per nom.Blnguyen 05:44...
Click to read more »samurai (talk) 07:52, 30 July 2013 (UTC) This is not an unusual case, see WP:BOOKSPAM. I have encountered a case myself, made more complicated by the fact that...
Click to read more »can't edit it yet either. Before you consider doing so, please read WP:BOOKSPAM and WP:REFSPAM. I suspect your book is genuinely a reliable source on the...
Click to read more »the edit. An edit summary might be "rv per WP:BOOKSPAM" or perhaps "rv unexplained addition, see WP:BOOKSPAM". Johnuniq (talk) 00:52, 7 November 2009 (UTC)...
Click to read more »figure that out). I've left a spam warning on their user talk page. WP:BOOKSPAM can be a real problem, and I'm inclined to treat the editor as a straight-forward...
Click to read more »I was alerted to a change to an article which was a citation added to the Sources section, with no apparent use of that citation in the article. After...
Click to read more »reviews are useless. Leibniz 20:39, 12 December 2006 (UTC) Delete More bookspam. Should be speedied, if it weren't for the previous afd. Article has been...
Click to read more »delete | links | watch | logs | views) - looks like either WP:ARTSPAM or WP:BOOKSPAM (love the bit of text " says Freeman, a laughing, vigorous 78" which is...
Click to read more »as these are seen as intent for promotional gain, in keeping with: WP:BOOKSPAM. Likewise, simply placing a self-published book in a Further reading section...
Click to read more »John F. Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories Acroterion 2023-04-06 Bookspam KGF: Chapter 2 Sharada Peeth RegentsPark 2023-04-07 Arbitration enforcement:...
Click to read more »