User talk:Hillgentleman/20071203181247
Latest comment: 16 年前 by Hillgentleman
- 有嘢講：/Comment： That is what we do. Adverts are labelled as copyright violations. That is the first reason why they don't belong here. Only after that should we go into the details of neutrality or verifiability.
--* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十二月三號（星期一）格林尼治 10點27分08秒。 2007年12月3號 (一) 10:27 (UTC)
- 有嘢講：/Comment：
I don't believe Ads are considered as copyright violation since the ad itself could be original. Original or copied Ads will be removed immediately. Or, I am wrong, please let me know.
--WikiCantona 2007年12月3號 (一) 11:44 (UTC)
- 有嘢講：/Comment： the state of being an advertisement does not bother us - it is independent of the fundamental principles. We can keep it so long as it does not violate copyrights and it contains verifiable facts and have references. There may be an issue of neutrality, but then others can supply their own viewpoints, and in any case that requires more discussion; there should have been relevant discussions in wikipedia in English.
--* -- :-) Hillgentleman | 書 | 二零零七年十二月四號（星期二）格林尼治 07點53分27秒。 2007年12月4號 (二) 07:53 (UTC)