Talk:Parenting plan

	This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
Parenting (inactive) This article is within the scope of WikiProject Parenting, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.ParentingWikipedia:WikiProject ParentingTemplate:WikiProject ParentingParenting articles

I have changed the link number 12 as it was dead and found a relevant link that contains information extracted from the guide (Varun 19:07, 30 September 2014 (UTC)) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.73.244 (talk) [reply]

I've added a link to www.custodyiq.com/pp_main.html which is a multi-page free resource on how to put together an effective parenting plan. It's among the most comprehensive non-commercial guides available on the web. Before removing, please discuss reasons.

(Custodyiq 17:07, 8 December 2006 (UTC))[reply]

I am seeking to add a link to the Parenting Plan entry of an example of a parenting plan that is both non-commercial (aka free - no one is after money) and has no copy right restrictions. The aim of providing this sample is to give people access to a useful resource that will give them a list of parenting plan elements or items to consider (from the real life sample parenting plan). This is not a self-promotion and the site only contains copies (in several formats) of the parenting plan.

Additionally, I have sought to add a link for the Shared Parenting Council of Australia, which provides free information for separated parents re parenting and parenting plans. This link is already at Shared Parenting and would be useful addition at Parenting Plan given that the Shared Parenting Council of Australia is an Australian co-operative not for profit organisation like the Shared Parenting Information Group (UK) and the National Fathers' Resource Center (USA). It doesn't seem consistent to allow the latter two but to exclude the Australian link.

My attempts are being thwarted by Hu12 who keeps removing this link/info and implying it is spam.

According to Wikipedia:External links http://en.wikipedia.orgview_html.php?sq=Qlik&lang=&q=WP:EL it is not SPAM:

What to link to:

There are several things which should be considered when adding an external link.

   * Is it accessible to the reader?
   * Is it proper in the context of the article (useful, tasteful, informative, factual, etc.)?
   * Is it a functional link, and likely to continue being a functional link?

Each link be considered on its merits, using the following guidelines. As the number of external links in an article grows longer, assessment should become stricter.

What should be linked to

  1. Articles about any organization, person, web site, or other entity should link to the official site if any.
  2. An article about a book, a musical score, or some other media should link to a site hosting a copy of the work if none of the "Links normally to be avoided" criteria apply.
  3. Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues, amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks) or other reasons.
  4. Sites with other meaningful, relevant content that is not suitable for inclusion in an article, such as reviews and interviews.

My actions are genuine and specific. The desire is to provide useful additional resources to readers of these pages that will help connect them and their children. There is no desire to profit or to spam.

Can this removal please stop? Or can you tell me how and where to lodge an appeal against this action?

Thank you, Manumit —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Manumit (talk • contribs) 04:02, 8 December 2006.

Copy from User_talk:Manumit; :First there is no need to cross-post the same message 3 times. Both articles Shared parenting and Parenting plan atract quite a bit of spam. second please refrain from altering notes left in articles as you did here [1] and here [2] it is consideredvandalism. Your contributions to Shared parenting consist mainly of adding external links [3],[4] as does your contributions to parenting plan [5], [6] and is considered WP:Spam. Looking through your contributions as a whole Manumit contibs, the majority seem to be external link related only. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a link farm. If you have a source to contribute, first contribute some facts that you learned from that source, then cite the source. Don't simply direct readers to another site for the useful facts; add useful facts to the article, then cite the site where you found them. You're here to improve Wikipedia -- not just to funnel readers off Wikipedia and onto some other site, right?

As you have stated on my talk page I am the author, according to Wikipedia external links policy Links normally to be avoided #3Links mainly intended to promote a website and #11 Links to personal websites WP:V. Hu12 09:15, 8 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]