User talk:UnnotableWorldFigure

Welcome!

Hello, UnnotableWorldFigure, and

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• Tutorial
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a

UnnotableWorldFigure, Luitgard has been impecabbly civil toward you, yet in this edit you made thinly-veiled

He is using Wikipedia as his SEO vehicle to smear a person in public by their first and last name, and I'm supposed to care that his anonymous handle is not being treated with respect?? Would you rather have people being uncivil toward AJH12345 on a discussion page or writing an attack page on Adrian J Hunter and obsessively pushing for it to be the first google hit for your name, then going around to the various links I posted and libelling you? UnnotableWorldFigure (talk) 20:26, 23 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

UnnotableWorldFigure, I would suggest you read

WP:CIVIL just so we are all clear on the guideline. Additionally, if there are violations of Wikipedia guidelines or if an editor makes edits outside guidelines they should be dealt with as such by using accepted Wikipedia methods or processes. My best to you. ttonyb (talk) 02:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply

]

Tony, the way Wikipedia is being used in this matter is beyond unacceptable and I will place the golden rule and my conscience above any of the site's internal guidelines. You have reverted to Luitgard's version that specifically set out to defame an individual on Google and that is not ok. This isn't majority rules or seniority rules or any of that nonsense when the outcome is that an individual is being targeted by their real name on the web's leading search engines. By the same token, WP:CIVIL may be an useful guideline when the only thing at stake is a bunch of people's anonymous handles insulting each other, but again, the much more important issue here is that a real person -- not their anonymous handle -- is being treated in an uncivil manner. I will revert your version to the last edit by Effie.wang which was the most reasonable balanced version that has been in existence in the last 24 hours, and which also happens to be the least damaging version that hits the top of Google's search results. I still maintain that Banner was correct in designating the page as an orphan. UnnotableWorldFigure (talk) 06:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Greg_Tseng_and_disruptive_editing. Thank you. — Gavia immer (talk) 03:55, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Dear UnnotableWorldFigure, I believe you are interested in this issue. I have proposed restoration of the word spammer to the intro of the article on the Greg Tseng talk page and solicit your comments on that proposal before proceeding further. Thanks and regards, Luitgard (talk) 15:05, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

as mentioned on the page in question, I think your suggestion for controversial internet entrepreneur is a more palatable option and i still question whether or not the page should even exist UnnotableWorldFigure (talk) 23:37, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello UWF, was this you? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:24.18.156.43 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Luitgard (talk • contribs) 17:28, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you care? I propose that you read the edits contributed from that IP on the article in question and compare them to the present version of the article. UnnotableWorldFigure (talk) 17:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm the wrong person to ask about Lost. ;-p My opinion on that would be pretty useless! :( But on the balance, you've helped the Tseng article by attracting readers and good editors. Later, Luitgard (talk) 22:11, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All right, well the point is that edit war was me adding episode titles and other people reverting them back to "TBA" and calling me a vandal. And sure enough, week by week, the people who called me a vandal restored my entries one by one. UnnotableWorldFigure (talk) 22:17, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:CoverHoundLogo.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 20:06, 12 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Grovo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Dropbox (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:38, 5 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm Elemented9. UnnotableWorldFigure, thanks for creating

I've just tagged the page, using our

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Credit.com, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Fast Company (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article CoverHound has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

ping me back

. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:34, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The article Credit.com has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing

ping me back

. Thank you,

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 04:46, 4 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Jujutacular (talk) 16:48, 14 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of CoverHound for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article CoverHound is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/CoverHound until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 02:57, 15 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Grovo

The article Grovo has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The company appears borderline notable, but this article is in need of

WP:COI

account). The text looks like it came directly from their marketing department. All that said, I'm not confident a G11 would stick and think the encyclopedia is better served with a TNT than a stubify.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be

deleted for any of several reasons

.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 21:19, 20 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:CoverHoundLogo.jpg

Thanks for uploading

claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media

).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:38, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current

review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:46, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply

]