If external links are so bad why even allow any links  Why not just remove them all    No we should NOT be linking to every Chinese astrology site from Wikipedia  We all knows the SPAM policies  Isnt this what all SPAM police and all user responsibility to weed thourgh the links  Use a little common sense when using the linkfarms suggestion  When there   new spam entries per day and the links are hugh linkfarm suggestion may make sense  When there are only a few links  and there are no frequent new spam insertion in the page then consider just remove that particular spam that appear instead of removing all the links that have been around for  year  You made a mistake admit it then recover your mistake  Do not cover your back with commonly supported excuse  Also instead of wasting my time proving all the links to the articles talk page why dont you spend sometime instead proving to all of us that this site has such a HIGH SPAM activity that it warrant you using the linkfarms method   Question about why you deleted my link  I posted a link to wwwjusticeforkevinorg a nonprofit site with valuable information about a man who was wrongfully convicted of rape You deleted my edit saying I was a spammer I respectfully disagree  this website would have saved Kevins life if he had had the information it contains and the makers of the site are dedicated to preventing this tragedy from happening to anyone else It should be available for Wikipedia readers interested in these lagal issues So how do I go about putting it back up  and maybe getting you to come down off of your high horse The preceding unsigned comment was added by    see  First off dont add the same link to over  pages in  minutes That looks really bad Second Wikipedia is not a collection of external links while he may have been subject to Megans law there are many such people and a link to every save soandso page would dwarf the article Finally stay civil insulting people is likely to make them more hostile to you    OK thats all well and good but its still within the Wikipedia rules What does it matter how fast they were added or that if EVERYONE did it what would happen I never insulted anyone but you sure seem to have taken this all to your head with deciding who should be included in these articles and who shouldnt And if you are sensitive about people being rude to you why delete their contributions Are you doing it out of your hostile anger or is it an actual appreciation for the rules Seems like the former based on your response Again this link is a perfectly acceptable addition to the sites it was posted on  both because of subject matter and pursuant to Wikipedia rules I am going to repost them and if they get deleted again because of your opinion then Ill report it to Wikipedia myselfThe preceding unsigned comment was added by     Get off your high horse seems like an insult to me And Im not sensitive at all Ive been called far worse things without batting an eye I just dont like it is all and people have easily been blocked for doing similar things before Besides Im being anything but hostile right now Im trying to work this out with you And if you repost I will block you again If you want to complain about me you can do it at the administrators noticeboard or request a rd opinion or go to the mediation cabal or bring it up on the talk page for the Wikipedia counterspam effort this is probably the closest thing to reporting it to Wikipedia And the external link guidelines say that links whose subject is not directly related There are many people who other people believe were wrongfully convicted of rape why is this man and not John Doe special     Oooh so THATs what its about  I have to prove to you that something is special and get you to approve it first This is a public website and youre being way too controlling with this The external link I added conformed to the subject matter and to every Wikipedia rule but you seem to not get that Im within Wikipedia