The site fits the criteria.
STOP EDITING OTHER PEOPLE'S TALK PAGE COMMENTS!!
This is a major violation of standard Wikipedia etiquette and protocol (except in certain special circumstances, none of which apply here) -- and it doesn't affect that fact that your IP number still remains publicly accessible in the Wikipedia page edit histories, regardless of what you do. If you didn't want your IP number to be publicly displayed, then you should have logged in with a User account. If you had taken some time to find out how and why things are done in Wikipedia (instead of viewing Wikipedia as a convenient tool to gain free publicity for your site), then you would have spared a lot of wasted effort, both by yourself and other people on Wikipedia. AnonMoos 15:55, 8 August 2006 (UTC)
Maybe you could explain on the talk page Talk:Chastity belt why your webpage is worthy of inclusion -- as opposed to getting into perpetual edit wars with those who disagree with you, or deleting all other external links in a snit. AnonMoos 12:45, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
- This page is a virtual chastity belt and fits the criteria of what should be included on this page. It seems as if my particular site is being targeted.
- It's being "targeted" because three or four people have seemingly independently found it not worthy of inclusion. It's up to you to go to Talk:Chastity belt and explain why you think it is worthy of inclusion. AnonMoos 01:31, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
Why did you perpetrate malicious disinformation on Talk:Chastity belt (editing other people's talk-page comments, which is a violation of Wikipedia etiquette and protocol), instead of participating in a discussion as to why a link to your site is worthy of inclusion? If you're trying to persuade us that your contributions are worthless, then you're certainly going about it in the best way! AnonMoos 10:39, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
I keep including my site because those that are interested in chastity belts, will come across this article. My site is a virtual chastity belt, and is actually intended for those that wear chastity belts. I understand that I might come across "asinine" and "juvenile", however I understand the rational human behaviour to want to keep someoe out, and that's what exactly the three of you are doing. I would like my site to be included into this listing, because I think it's a valid resource for those that are interested in chastity belts. I would rather not have this be an "edit war", because I don't think that it is anybody's child hood dream to becomome involved in disputes of attrition in such a forum like this.
- Perhaps you should read Wikipedia's article on m:When should I link externally. Your site doesn't provide any authorative information on the history or modern use of chastity belts, which is why I keep removing it. zabadoh 06:47, 2 August 2006 (UTC)
Dude, I differ on an opinion. Turns out the era we are living in right now, is the modern era. This website will be an important relic to people of the future.
- Did you read the guidelines for linking externally? How exactly does "You are locked today" or "You are unlocked today" provide verifiable information on the past or present use of chastity belts? zabadoh 08:06, 3 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad you like the site. Sounds like a chastity belt to me. Are you jealous of me?
- I'm not saying anything about your site. No, it doesn't. Do you like the attention you're getting? zabadoh 19:40, 4 August 2006 (UTC)
I get a good amount of hits. You guys (the mayors of wikipedia) are kinda annoying.