User talk:Carlang

Welcome!

Hello, Carlang, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Joaquin008 ^(talk) 07:21, 9 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mark Portmann

The article Mark Portmann has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. ThemFromSpace 05:50, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Mark Portmann

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

Despite the assertions of notability, most of this appears unable to be verified in reliable sources. He also hasn't been the focus of significant coverage. Since this is a paid editing job (see talk page) that violates our core policy that Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion I will take to AfD if both prods are removed.

While all 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 {{dated prod}} 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 {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. ThemFromSpace 06:00, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

August 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. ThemFromSpace 06:01, 10 August 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Mark Portmann

I have nominated Mark Portmann, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Portmann. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ThemFromSpace 03:35, 17 August 2010 (UTC)

Re: Your comment

As I stated in the edit summary that you can read in the article history, I removed your comment because it was a duplicate of your comment on the talk page of HaeB. Statements now like "I choose to believe the former." are not very meaningful because there can be no agitation here - we never communicated. I took your comment as just that and that's it for the matter for me, please don't treat this so seriously. Also in the future make sure to leave comments at the bottom of a user talk page so it can be easily spotted and please sign your posts with four tildes. Regards Hekerui (talk) 20:47, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Notability question

Hi Carlang,

thank you for the message. First off, I suggest you to use a sandbox, so that you can work on the article and try to improve it without any problem. Always remember to provide reliable, verifiable and independent secondary sources. If you are unsure about the notability of the school, please see WP:ORG. Regards -- Joaquin008 ^(talk) 16:35, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Carlang/Babatunde Rotimi has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Babatunde Rotimi, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article. Your draft is waiting for a review by an experienced editor, if you have any questions please ask on our Help Desk! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 19:34, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Babatunde Rotimi.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 19:38, 3 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Babatunde Rotimi.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! avs5221^{(talk|contrib)} 15:08, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Babatunde Rotimi, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:08, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

TalkBack Carlang

Hi Excirial, Thanks for your feedback on the page I created (sited link below). I've noticed my error. It appears that I included the references in the external links and failed to add the necessary citations within the article. Chalk one up for rookie error (I've been away from wikipedia for months now).

Unless I've missed something, I think I've corrected those errors now. Please read through and let me know if there's anything else that you think needs changing. You'll find the revised article at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Babatunde_Rotimi. My references include articles from CNN, The Guardian and an official press release from Caines. That counts as reliable doesn't it?

Carlang (talk) 06:36, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hiyas there Carlang,

Looks entirely fine to me, definitely better sources then most article's. Seeing the changes i would say it is in good enough shape to move it to the mainspace, so that has been done as we speak write. I also note that you left a comment on Avs5221's talk page regarding the page notability of the page, and i think that AVS is referring to WP:BLP1E, or biographies for persons notable for just a single event (Or rather: Having received media coverage for 1 event), where there is no indication that they will receive coverage again (As an example: There was an article about a girl who fell down a drain, and half the countries newspapers actually covered that incident. Plenty of decent sources to work with, but no lasting importance nor notability thus no need for an article).

Winning a notable price is another story though, as winning it requires mostly indicates that someone is important enough in his or her field of experience to actually be considered for an award. I had a chat with Avs as well, and we both seem to agree on that point, so well, no reason not to approve the article as already done. Besides this i can say little else then "Well done on the article, looks fine. And thanks for writing it! :)" Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:26, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Excirial,

Thanks for the help. I understand what you (and AVS) meant in the way of notability. I'll be sure to take it into consideration which future articles. If it's okay with you, I'd really appreciate it if I could stop by to ask questions on any issues that I may be unclear with when working on future projects.

Have a good one.

41.219.195.96 (talk) 21:31, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Sure, happy to help if i can. I'm mostly involved in maintenance work as opposed to article writing, but i assume i can answer most questions (Or at least point in the right direction). Just to be sure i would point out that there is also a Helpdesk and an IRC Chat help channel around in case you need them, since i might not be around to much at times. Note that the chat channel can be more or less populated depending on the time of day, as it is manned (like the rest of Wikipedia) by volunteers. If no one is around the helpdesk or a user talk page such as mine is a more surefire bet to get a response. Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 17:43, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Carlang: Some Advice

Hi, I'm back. I was considering rewriting the content for this page. I'm trying to improve my experience at formatting articles. Got any tips on how I should proceed with this one in particular. I'm guessing I don't have to worry about references in this case. My current line of thought is to use the page of an established footballer like Zidane or (God bless him) Messi but I'm worried that that might be over reaching.. Carlang (talk) 08:31, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Hiyas there Carlang,

Personally i would suggest going over the article content first, and at least cursory verifying that the added references support what has been written. When taking over another persons article for continuation you might find that it looks decent at first glance, while having some flaws that are hidden on first sight (Copyright violations, references that don't support what has been written and so on). Best to check in advance rather than finding out in retrospect. (After a lot of work)

After that you might want to look at the structure and formatting of the article. Right now it contains several 1 or 2 line sections, which are really not needed (A single biography section might actually be enough to cover the limited amount of content in the article, perhaps with a subsection or two to divide his football and other activities). After that you probably want to do the basic article style and formatting such as adding interwiki links, bolding the subject on the first line, adding some categories and perhaps a "see also" or "external links" section is the need arises. I would also advice merging the two infoboxes - all the content can be covered in the Template:Infobox football biography infobox, so there is no real need to use a generic infobox template as well.

I would definitely advice using another article as an example for your own, and i would suggest to (always) use an article rated as a good article, since you can be certain these are well written and correctly formated. It might be wise to use a smaller article such as Ken Barnes (footballer) or Fandi Ahmad as an example though. World-class players such as Messi generally have a huge load of content covered in the article, which warrants a different article and section structure then a smaller article would use. (For example, Messi's carrer is split in multiple sections with an even larger amount of subsections, whereas Ken Barnes just needs two sections to cover his entire career).

Hope this helps, and with kind regards, Excirial ^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 18:20, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Hi Excirial,

Thanks so much for the advice. They were so insightful. I'll get to work on it and see if I can do justice to your recommendations.

Have a lovely weekend.

CarlCarlang (talk) 22:42, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jordan Older.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Electriccatfish2 (talk) 19:22, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Jordan Older.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Kilopi (talk) 00:01, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

EmbroidMe, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Ritchie333 (talk) 11:38, 2 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:Uassist.me.JPG)

Thanks for uploading File:Uassist.me.JPG. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:28, 11 August 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Company uassistme.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Company uassistme.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a 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. Skier Dude (talk) 02:38, 14 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Gailen David.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Mdann52 (talk) 07:00, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UAssist.ME.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Snowysusan 10:03, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UAssist.ME.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! LegoK^ontribsT^alkM 01:08, 18 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Gailen David, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

SarahStierch (talk) 01:05, 20 August 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for August 23

Hi. When you recently edited Sony Alpha 37, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bravia (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) 11:58, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UAssist.ME.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 17:48, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Carlang. You have new messages at Callanecc's talk page.
Message added 18:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 18:17, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Replied on my talk page again. Callanecc (talk • contribs • logs) 19:43, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:EmbroidMe Storefront, Westminster, Colorado.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:EmbroidMe Storefront, Westminster, Colorado.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 09:08, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

PhotographyTalk advertising

I want you to stop adding links to PhotographyTalk, it seems to be advertising. Tagremover (talk) 17:28, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Tagremover,

Thanks for stopping by.

I've also been adding relevant content to the different pages.

I thought it was okay to contribute relevant information to Wikipedia ::articles. Just so I'm clear. Are you concerned about the fact that I am adding credible information to the articles (which I am) or is ::your grievance with the source for most of them.

I'm sorry if it appears like advertising. That was NOT my intention.

Kind Regards Carlang (talk) 18:51, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

• • As I've said at ANI, not every site is ok for an external link, and adding the same "not ok" link to many articles is spamming. Please stop it. I appreciate you using AfC to try to bring articles here, and I don't care if you are getting paid to do it, but we still have policies on what is acceptable for external linking. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 21:53, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Dennis Brown, Like I mentioned to Tagre, Spamming wasn't my intention and I stopped adding any Photograpytalk reference the instant I got his message. I have a lot of respect and love for Wikipedia and I wouldn't want to do anything that would discredit or harm the site. I apologize. You learn everyday. Sometimes from experiences and sometimes from mistakes. Today, I've learned from a little of both. Carlang (talk) 06:24, 9 September 2012 (UTC)

ANI notice

Hello. There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding WP:LINKSPAM. The thread is Photographytalk.com spam. Thank you. —Dennis Bratland (talk) 20:52, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Cellular Sales.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the help desk, via real time chat with helpers, or on the

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! — Dmitrij D. Czarkoff (talk•track) 22:00, 16 September 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Carlang. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 09:34, 17 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Carlang. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 00:04, 18 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Carlang. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 00:43, 18 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Carlang. You have new messages at Czarkoff's talk page.
Message added 06:54, 18 September 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Request: JSTOR Info

All comments should be left in "User talk:", not "User:". Here is the article that you're looking for: [1]. Please let me know when you downloaded the file and I will remove it from the repository. Next time, please be specific with your article request (such as including the title, page number) that can speed up the search. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 05:01, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 22

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Marianna Biernacka, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages German and Polish (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) 15:26, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Cellular Sales, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Stuartyeates (talk) 08:27, 24 September 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Gailen David.png

Thanks for uploading File:Gailen David.png. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:15, 27 September 2012 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (File:CellularSales.jpg)

Thanks for uploading File:CellularSales.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:45, 28 September 2012 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nialaya beads.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Nialaya beads.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-enwikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-enwikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use in|article name}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 14:12, 29 September 2012 (UTC)

Specifying "critics"

Thanks for editing ReachOut Healthcare America!

One little thing: About this edit, there are users that tag "Critics say" and ask "which ones?" - The reason why I specified the newspaper is to answer the question to the best degree possible - the newspaper doesn't specify which ones, but we can say the newspaper said so and remove any tags asking which ones. By saying "The newspaper says critics say" we have the best way of knowing who is making the assertion WhisperToMe (talk) 05:39, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Also, about this edit, the source article says "ReachOut Healthcare's dental practice was paid $12.5 million from AHCCCS over the past two years, according to records obtained by The Arizona Republic." - So it is saying it in the singular "dental practice" rather than "practices" - Thanks for fixing the error I made regarding two companies instead of three WhisperToMe (talk) 05:43, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

BTW

		Barnstar
		Awarded to User:Carlang for fixing an error I had made at ReachOut Healthcare America

I like to give barnstars to people who fix errors I make on accident. WhisperToMe (talk) 18:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. Lol

Carlang (talk) 16:19, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nialaya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Diddy (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) 09:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)

Charmbracelet

Hello Carlang. I am returning the request for the GOCE copy edit of Charmbracelet to the pool for somebody else to pick up, as you appear to have done almost nothing on it for two weeks now. Please don't book articles unless you intend to work on them immediately, as it may result in a delay to the request if someone else would have been willing to do it. Thanks. --Stfg (talk) 09:17, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Carlang/Blake Mallen has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Blake Mallen, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article. Your draft is waiting for a review by an experienced editor, if you have any questions please ask on our Help Desk! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 10:52, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

GOCE September 2012 drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors September 2012 backlog elimination drive wrap-up Participation: Out of 41 people who signed up this drive, 28 copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: We achieved our primary goal of clearing July, August, September and October 2011 from the backlog. This means that, for the first time since the drives began, the backlog is less than a year. At least 677 tagged articles were copy edited, although 365 new ones were added during the month. The total backlog at the end of the month was 2341 articles, down from 8323 when we started out over two years ago. We completed all 54 requests outstanding before September 2012 as well as eight of those made in September. Copy Edit of the Month: Voting is now over for the August 2012 competition, and prizes will be issued soon. The September 2012 contest is closed for submissions and open for voting. The October 2012 contest is now open for submissions. Everyone is welcome to submit entries and to vote. – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 23:30, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 7

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nialaya, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Asian (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) 15:57, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Blake Mallen, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Mdann52 (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:Blake Mallen.png

Thanks for uploading File:Blake Mallen.png. I noticed the description page specifies that this media item is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails the first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media item could be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media item is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the file description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the file discussion page, write the reason why this media item is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. David1217 ^{What I've done} 22:50, 11 October 2012 (UTC)

GOCE fall newsletter

Fall Events from the Guild of Copy Editors The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in its events: The October 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest is currently in the submissions stage. Submit your best October copy edit there before the end of the month. Submissions end, and discussion and voting begin, on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC). Voting is in progress for the September 2012 Copy Edit of the Month Contest. Everyone is welcome to vote, whether they have entered the contest or not. NEW!! In the week from Sunday 21 October to Saturday 27 October, we are holding a Project Blitz, in which we will copy edit articles tagged with {{copyedit}} belonging to selected project(s). For the first blitz, we'll start with WikiProject Olympics and WikiProject Albums and add more Projects to the blitz as we clear them. The blitz works much like our bimonthly drives, but a bit simpler. Everyone is welcome to take part, and barnstars will be awarded. November 2012 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in 2011 and to complete all requests placed before the end of October. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in 2011", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Stfg, Allens, and Torchiest. >>> Blitz sign-up <<<         >>> Drive sign-up <<< To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 19:06, 18 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Body by Vi Challenge.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 13:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Body by Vi Challenge, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

FoCuSandLeArN (talk) 00:36, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Body by Vi Challenge for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Body by Vi Challenge 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/Body by Vi Challenge 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 template from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 02:01, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Blake Mallen for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Blake Mallen 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/Blake Mallen 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 template from the top of the article. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:44, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

IOnRoad, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Mdann52 (talk) 13:14, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Just a mark of thanks for all the articles you have submitted to AFC - and your willingness to fix the possible faults in them :) Mdann52 (talk) 13:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Barnstar. *Giddy Cowboy dance*! Carlang (talk) 13:58, 9 November 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for November 10

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited IOnRoad, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Android (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) 11:53, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

I've reviewed your contributions, and they're largely a series of articles on companies and products which are, at best, marginally notable written in advertising-like prose and articles on clearly non-notable people associated with these firms (also written in advertising-like prose). As such, I'm pretty sure that you're here to advertise these companies. Nick-D (talk) 23:16, 10 November 2012 (UTC)

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Carlang (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

This block isn't necessary. All the articles I've written have been submitted through the AFC and carefully reviewed before being approved. If any article had been flagged for containing promotional prose, I would have (and I have) rewritten it in line with the recommendations. This appears to be a stiff arm tactic against me because of the current Blake Mallen dispute but I could be wrong. For the record I've edited several TV show pages such as Go On (TV series), Revolution (TV series) and the(The Good Wife and worked FREELY on articles submitted to AFC by other users such as Marianna Biernacka. The delete refers to a series of contribution involving non-notable people, but other than the currently disputed Blake Mallen page, I am in the dark as to what other non-notable person the administrator is talking about. My most recent contributions on an individual have been Babatunde Rotimi a Caine prize winner and Marianna Biernacka,a polish saint (originally submitted by an unknown part to the AFC). Instead of posting company pages directly, I have always chosen to submit it through the AFC process where it is properly screened for notability and prose. My recent additions to Visalus (a page I did not create] was in line with a recommendation by another editor who rightly pointed out that creating a separate page for the Body By Vi Challenge would be redundant since both pages shared most of the same references. I'm a fairly new contributor to Wikipedia but a review of my history will SHOW I've always been quick to correct any raised errors or abandon projects that are disputed with. I was recently awarded a barnstar for the very same reason. My skill as an editor has improved in the last 12 months, but I'm always open to learning more. If there's any content that's considered as spam, a simple note of caution or professional advise would be far more effective than a summarily block.

Decline reason:

Decline unblock. Serious and legitimate concerns have been raised regarding your motivation for the promotional articles you have created, and you have skirted answering them. In order for an unblock to be considered, you must clearly and unambiguously answer the following:

• Are you being paid to edit? (Answer with a "yes" or "no".)
• If so, who is paying you, for what purpose, and in what areas?
• If not, why have you created so many articles which appear to be promotional, and how do you plan to remedy this? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 07:42, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Carlang (talk) 06:47, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

As noted in my rationale, I've blocked you for creating a series of spammy articles (several of which are currently nominated for deletion), and this isn't due to just the one article. Editors have in fact raised concerns with the articles you created in the past (eg, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UAssist.ME, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark Portmann as but two examples), but you've kept on creating spammy articles, presumably for pay judging from that AfD (which isn't banned by itself, but it is when you're using Wikipedia to create ads for your clients). I note that several of the articles you've worked on (such as ViSalus and Nialaya) have a history of being repeatedly created in the past as spam. 08:13, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

It looks like Carlang has done useful non-promotional editing such as Babatunde Rotimi and Marianna Biernacka. However, his spammy contributions are a problem. Perhaps some sort of probational conditions could be worked out. First and foremost, we would require that Carlang disclose any potential conflicts of interest. Carlang, is anyone paying you to edit Wikipedia or do PR for any of the subjects you are editing? Do you have a financial interest in any of the subjects you are editing? If so, we need for you to explicitly disclose those, per the WP:COI guidelines. Kaldari (talk) 08:29, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

The answer to those questions is likely yes. MER-C 12:20, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I understand the reasons for your concern but I must point out that my contribution to the Mark Portman was done over two years ago when I was less than familiar with Wikipedia's rules having only joined the community a few weeks earlier. Unless memory fails me, I believe my contribution was in fact deleted the very next day and the current page--as it (stands word for word--was done by someone else. I did not create anything for many months until early this year when I submitted the Babatunde Rotimi page.

As for the UAssistMe project, I submitted the article to the AFC for review and was;

• Told it was unacceptable because it appeared promotional.
• I then rewrote it, passed that test but was informed that it failed to meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines, after which I abandoned it.

I did not at any point try to force it into the Wikipedia live space as a spammer would likely have done. If the page is currently live then it must have be done by someone else.

I wish I could say that all my contributions have been flawless, but they haven't. There's a mountain of rules linked with Wikipedia and I have stumbled over a few every now and then. The key issue though is I have never stumbled over the same mistake twice. For instance a few months ago, I ignorantly added reference links aimed at PhotographyTalk. I received a message from an editor (TagreMover)that this was Illegal and I instantly stopped. I even deleted a few of the links thereafter as a sign of my regret but abandoned it after someone suggested doing this on the ANI. Wiki records will prove that I haven't added a single reference since beyond the contributing edits I've made.

Like I mentioned, I'm a growing editor. In all my conversations with editors I have always stressed that I value the sanctity of Wikipedia above anything else. 90% of my contribution to Elance have been over the last 6 months after a long hiatus involving study so I've had to hit the ground. Because I am trying to improve and learn more about Wiki, I have always submitted my articles through the AFC for constructive reviews. This has helped. I also joined the GOCE and took up the mantle to work on several of the pages listed Charmbracelet with no external prompting. To ensure that my edits were positive I even signed up for the mentorship program asking for guidance.

For the record I was paid for both the UAssist.Me and EmbroidMe projects. When the former was turned down for lack of notability, I informed the client that the page creation would not be possible. I chose my recent iOnRoad project because I was trying to create a B or A class page on my own and I felt the subject had significant coverage to provide me with the material that I needed. Because I believe these were very well written, I used the Company of Heroes and Whatsapp page as a guiding template for creating the content and sections (including the development section which was recently deleted as being promotional). After days of working on the page, I was delighted when the created article was awarded a C class and even happier when I got a Barnstar for my efforts. Now sections of the page have been decribed as spam.

My actions over the last few months have been transparent. I have always sought the reviews of editors while writing articles and abandoned projects that were deemed unworthy of Wikipedia cyberspace. When I first started work on the Visalus page, I contacted the editor who wrote the bulk of th page to ask for advise and suggestions on the best way of adding content. I maintain only one account which I use for my posts and retain the same name in the IRC channel. When questions about the Blake Mallen page were raised, I visited StuartYeats Talk page and politely asked for advise on the best way I could rectify the error. His reply was a curt "No problem. I've AfD'd Blake Mallen. Stuartyeates (talk)".

Barely a week later my account was blocked. I understand that a hard line must be drawn with spammers. But given my contribution and consistent efforts to get advise, I think I'm being harshly punished. Especially since the allegations involve articles I created over 24 months ago.

I'm going to comment here in so far as the facts touch on myself and Blake Mallen. You created the page, through AfC. I redirected the page to ViSalus. You reverted my redirect and posted to my talk page where you attempted to divine my intentions and said "I hope this was okay." Since I was completely OK with you reverting my edit, I said so when I said that I'd nominated Blake Mallen for AfD. Stuartyeates (talk) 17:53, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Stuarts, Thanks for your input.

For the record, below is a copy of the conversation. Prior to this, you had suggested that a merge and redirect was the best solution for the Body By VI Challenge page. A few minutes after this observation you merged and redirected the Blake Mallen page but did not (and still haven't) redirect the Body By Vi Challenge.

Confused, I stopped by your page to ask if this was accidental and if my correction was a mistake--especially because the Blake Mallen page had NOT been in dispute up on to that point. It was after my polite question that you flagged the page for deletion--still ignoring my questions on the best ways of addressing the body by vi page.

Conversation

Hi Stuart, Thanks for your contribution towards the above listed page. I recognize the concerns raised and I agree that a merge and redirect to the company page may be a logical solution given the similarity in theme . However, it appears like you've accidentally redirected the page of the company's founder and CEO Blake Mallen and NOT the disputed Body by Challenge. I've reverted the edit. I hope this was okay.

Regarding the suggested merge, how do I go about merging the key content in the current Body By Vi challenge with the Visalus page? I respect Wikipedia and the last thing I would want is to add anything considered promotional. It is why I submitted the article through the AFC screen process. Kind Regards Carlang (talk) 09:49, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I've AfD'd Blake Mallen. Stuartyeates (talk) 18:45, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

End of Conversation.

My question is why, after trying so hard to get advise from seasoned editors (including StuartYeats) to help with improving the neutrality of the pages I write, am I being summarily banned? Even when Stuart AFd the page it was on grounds of non-notability and not promotional writing. The first I heard of promotional content was when my account was blocked.

And from what I can tell from an ongoing investigation, it appears like my block is precipitated by my actions 2 years ago without taking into context my willingness to fix my errors and improve the quality of my contributions.

Let's concentrate on how to move forward rather than rehashing the past. It appears that you have a genuine interest in contributing to Wikipedia which has perhaps been muddied by some financial interests. Unfortunately, Wikipedia is under a rather constant barrage of spamming and PR promotional efforts, which is why there is such a harsh reaction to these types of situations. Wikipedia does, however, allow editors to participate who have a conflict of interest (i.e. are paid to edit), but only under a very strict set of guidelines (WP:COI). The best way to convince an administrator to unblock your account would be to thoroughly review these guidelines and explain how you intend to meet them in the future. I would also recommend reading Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2012-04-30/Paid editing. Take a look at Pete's userpage for a good example of a disclosure statement: User:Peteforsyth. Kaldari (talk) 20:33, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

As I noted above, this block was imposed as you have a sustained history of writing articles which are advertisements for their subjects, and not just for recent or long-ago articles. Nick-D (talk) 01:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nick. I understand the reason behind your block.

All I'm pointing out is that the contested articles were written, formally submitted to the AFC, reviewed by external editors and cleared as acceptable. If the editors had asked me to rewrite the articles because they read like adverts and I refused then a block would be justified. But I am punished for an offence I didn't even know I was committing despite my obvious efforts to ensure that the article met Wikipedia's guidelines.

It's like visiting a country and being told at the counter that the legal speed limit is 50 mph only to be arrested at the next bend for overspeeding at 30mph.

Where is the justice in that?

Like Kaldari right pointed out, there's no point rehashing old points. I've been given this medium to appeal my case and find out the needed requirements for unblocking my account. I've read up on Wikipedia's COI rules and learnt more about disclosure statments (Thanks Kaldari). But beyond this,

What else do I need to do to get my account unblocked?

Carlang (talk) 08:29, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Unless you actually convince administrators that we won't need to delete half (or more) of the articles you create, you're not likely to be unblocked. Just because an article makes it through AFC does not mean it's going to survive long-term, or that it even should have passed AFC. Making articles that meet basic guidelines has always been a "rule" around here - nothing has ever changed. If indeed you have made a single article about a topic with which you have WP:COI, even the more reason to be concerned - disclosure statements won't fix that (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:30, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nick-D,

I'm willing to forfeit my rights to creating new articles for the next 3 years.

Would it be possible to get my account reinstated under a probational deal where my contribution towards improving articles are restricted to articles on the GOCE as well as TV and film pages? You can block my account permanently the second I create a new article within this period. This arrangement would give me the room to improve on my editorial skills without you needing to worry about me creating contentious pages.

3 years is a bit excessive. How about the following conditions:

1. No new articles for 1 year
2. Strict adherence to WP:COI (especially WP:COIU), including full disclosure of any Wikipedia work related to any companies or organizations you are working for or contracted with
3. You must recuse yourself from any deletion discussions related to such articles
4. The majority of your edits should not be related to COI-articles
5. If you are ever unsure of the appropriateness of an edit (especially due to COI or notability concerns), you will seek guidance from a more experienced editor

If you're willing to agree to all of these conditions, I'm willing to probationally unblock your account (barring strong objections from anyone else). Kaldari (talk) 23:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)

I agree that the conditions Kaldari suggests are appropriate. However, it would also be helpful if you could explain what non-COI topics (including specific articles) you wish to work on exactly given that you will not be unblocked to continue to use Wikipedia to advertise your clients. Nick-D (talk) 01:10, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nick, Thanks for giving me the opportunity to correct my mistakes. I plan on investing my time towards the "help out" articles listed within the Wikipedia:Community portal. Those involve checking out references, cleaning up articles, expanding short articles and improving the prose of articles among other options.

In line with the proposed probational rules, I'll steer clear of the section listed 'create an article someone requested' that is also found on the page.

I also plan on working on the pages of TV shows released under the 2012/2013 season. There are dozens of those, most of which are bare and there is no shortage of credible content online that I can work with.

Finally, I also accept all the rules offered by Kaldari.

If I should need help, support or guidance at any point, I'll contact you directly.

Hello Carlang, it looks like Seraphimblade would like a more comprehensive overview of your paid editing activities. In particular, are you currently being paid to edit by anyone, and if so by whom? What articles in the past have you been paid to edit (besides UAssist.Me and EmbroidMe)? I hope you understand we're not trying to conduct a witchhunt, we just want to make sure that you are willing to be open about your conflicts of interest and collaborate in good faith. Keeping a huge project like Wikipedia free of bias and undue financial influence is a difficult job and we appreciate your cooperation and consideration. Kaldari (talk) 18:23, 13 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Kaldari, I understand. To answer your first question, No. I am not currently being paid to edit any article. I understand the concerns so I'll just go over my contribution history.

• Mark Portmann: Created 2 years ago from youthful exuberance.
• Babtunde Rotimi: I haven't contacted him, but being a winner of a writing award myself, I was interested in the news article and turned to Wikipedia for information on him. When I found that there was none. I decided to create a page.
• EmbroidMe. Paid to create the page which I submitted through the AFC to ensure that it fit Wiki's guidelines.
• Gailen David. Like Babtunde, I was interested in the subject because I'd seen a couple of his mock videos.
• UassistMe. Contacted by the party that offered me the EmbroidMe project to see if I could help with the page's creation. I submitted it to the AFC, it was turned down, so I politely informed the party that the project was a bust.
• Mariana Bierkna. It was listed in Wiki Commons as an article for request that was dated by over a year. Started work on it with help from members of the IRC who sent across PDF files and access to a librarian.
• IonRoad: My latest attempt to create a page that was worthy of at least a C class. I chose the subject because it seemed well covered and clearly within the notability requirements of Wikipedia.

I did some work for the owner of PhotographyTalk but after I was warned that my efforts amounted to spam, I abandoned the project and was not paid. I believe he hired someone else after that. Before I was hired to work on the UassistMe and EmbroidMe project, I was made to sign an NDA. Considering that this is an open forum, I'm hoping these disclosures will be deleted. I've also been approached at least four times by external parties who wanted to have their articles included in Wikipedia. But after reviewing their companies, I informed them that they did not meet the requirements of Wikipedia.

I believe this answers 2 out of Seraphims questions, as to the last 'why have you created so many articles which appear to be promotional and what plans do you have to be remedy it', my only defence is that I did not know that the articles appeared promotional because multiple editors in the IRC channel assured me that they weren't when I requested a review. Regarding my plans of addressing this problem, I believe my proposed probational terms, combined with those suggested by Kaldari and Nick gives me more than enough time to hone my editorial skills.

Regards07:02, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

There's rather a lot of missing from that contribution history (for instance, and rather obviously, the recent work you did relating to the Visalus and Nialaya businesses), and your statement that you were unaware that the articles you were creating were spammy raises real questions to me about your ability to contribute neutral content. It's also not credible given the concerns raised by several editors as part of the AfD of Mark Portmann in 2010. As I don't think that you're being straight with us I'm strongly opposed to you being unblocked. Nick-D (talk) 09:01, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi Nick, The reason why I didn't talk about the Visalus and Nialaya articles is because I assumed Kaldari and SeraphimBlade wanted to know more about my contribution beyond those already being discussed. When you deleted my page, you pointed out the obvious COI in Nialaya and Visalus pages which I didn't deny. I assumed that the current request was aimed at learning more about the other pages that I have contributed to, and not those currently on record. It is why I also talked about my contribution towards PhotographyTalk--which I do not believe has been raised yet in this discussion.

I'm being as honest about my flaws as I can. The reason I didn't think that adding photography references were spammy was because at the time, I was adding information to the affected pages as well. Most of the affected pages were stubs or had only a handful of references at best. You have to understand that at the time, I was barely three days old in Wikipedia years and there were a lot of rules that I simply was not aware off. The same is true about the Mart Portmann. If you check my contribution history, you'll notice that between 2010 and 2012, I barely visited this community.

My intentions are genuine and my motives sincere. As it stands, my two major grievances as I perceive them are Creating promotional content--which unfortunately cleared the scrutiny of the AFC. And working on articles with a COI without declaring them.

You've had over a decade to familiarize yourself with the community. I've barely scratched the surface. It is why I am asking to be allowed to work within the WikiCommon help where such pitfalls can be avoided while I learn more about Wiki rules. If that's not being straight, then I apologize.

You are still not being clear on what you've been paid to edit here. So far you have, in a series of roundabout and somewhat evasive answers, admitted to being paid for: editing/creating the suites of articles related to Nialaya and Visalus; creating Uassist.Me and EmbroidMe; and "product placement" reference spam for Photographytalk.com. Instead, you define Mark Portmann as "youthful exuberance". Were you also paid for that youthful exuberance? Yes or No? Were you paid for creating Cellular Sales and IOnRoad? Yes or No?

The fact that you put some of these through the AfC procedure doesn't make them any less harmful to Wikipedia. AfC has an enormous backlog. Genuine articles are being neglected because it is filled with paid editors like you promoting non-notable or extremely marginal companies and people. Valuable volunteer editor time is taken up reviewing these, cleaning them up, taking them to deletion discussions, etc. etc. Yet, you take these editors to task for not providing you with free advice on how to make your paid advertising less promotional? If you are unblocked, I think you should agree to neither create nor edit articles on any living people or on any companies or products for at least a year. Voceditenore (talk) 15:07, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

• I might want to point out that being paid to edit isn't against policy at the English Wikipedia. There have been a number of RfCs and discussions on the topic and the community has been pretty loud in declaring that they don't want paid editing itself to be a bar to editing. Promotional editing (spamming) is against policy, regardless of if there is remuneration or not, and should be the focus here. Policy clearly states we can't refuse to unblock someone solely based on their status as being paid or not, no matter how distasteful that may be to some of us. If the editor will agree to avoid creating articles for a year, stay away from adding external links and avoid any editing that is promotional in nature, and demonstrate they understand this, I'm inclined to unblock since they seem to at least get the concern here. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 16:15, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

Paid editing per se is not against policy, but as you know, it is strongly discouraged, especially the creation of articles with a COI. In my view, it is inherently promotional to create articles for companies, products and people which are non-notable or of extremely marginal notability, a very good indication of which is that these companies and people have to pay someone to write an article about them. It is also disruptive. Voceditenore (talk) 16:59, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

I fully agree with that. However, I think in the long run it's more productive to convert promotional editors into editors that understand and abide by WP:COI rather than just banning them and playing wack-a-mole. These companies are going to hire editors whether we like it or not. It's much better for us if some of those editors are at least half-way ethical about their work here, which it seems Carlang is receptive too. He's already offered to abstain from creating new articles and abide by COI, and I'm happy to mentor him further to keep him out of trouble. Kaldari (talk) 18:26, 14 November 2012 (UTC)

As an admin, I don't have the luxury of using my own view, and must adhere to the consensus of the community, which has been loud and clear that pay can not be used as a reason to block. It is the deeds that matter, not the motivations. In this case, I am comfortable that Nick acted properly in the block, without question, and it was the deeds that matter, but if we are convinced they understand the real problem, the promotional aspect of the writing, then we are compelled to unblock, regardless of pay status. It doesn't require that either of us likes or agrees with it, as there is a consensus to this effect. And I do agree with Kaldari here, and just waiting for a reply from Carlang himself. It is always better to help someone become a good editor rather than pushing them into becoming a bad sockmaster. Dennis Brown - 2¢ © Join WER 11:45, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not sure how my replies are coming of as evasive but just to answer the most recent question; I stated that the IonRoad was a personal project that I chose because I wanted to work on a page that offered some value and was at least worth of C class. And no. I wasn't paid for the Mark Portmann project. I used the term youthful exuberance because it was my first visit to Wikipedia and I was curious to see if I could simply make the page. It got deleted almost immediately and was then rewritten by a different editor.

Regarding Voceditenore opinions, I need to point out that I didn't just submit these 'promotional' pages to the AFC. I logged into the IRC channel, contacted several editors, asked them to please read the page to let me know if there was anything I missed, and after several minutes of review, they came back with a 'its fine' verdict. I did this during the course of the page's creation and even after I had submitted it to the AFC. Most of the contested pages were less than 600 words, but not once did any of the editors point out that they appeared promotional. More importantly, the pages were approved several weeks later by different editors. If a page is reviewed by several editors and cleared by al as being without promotional content, its harder for me to realize that there's something wrong.

I imagine that if you'd admitted being paid to create those pages in any of those conversations you may have received a rather different response. Why did you not disclose this? I'm really concerned about your claims of being unable to distinguish between creating advertisements and encyclopedic content and repeated instance that the editors at AfC need to take some blame rather than you for the material you posted, particularly given that you were editing these articles for payment and at least one of your articles was in fact rejected as spam (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/UAssist.ME). Nick-D (talk) 10:38, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

I also find Carlang's continuing contention that all the problems he has created were simple mistakes because he couldn't learn the rules in just two years not all credible. One of the very first notices he received back in 2010 was a COI notice. It's still at the top of this page and refers to this incident. He obviously didn't read it, or decided to ignore it. It quite clearly says to avoid

"linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).".

Two years later, on a paid contract, he added literally dozens of spam links to articles for his client, and claims that he had no idea this wasn't acceptable. In addition, he is still contending that as long as the language itself isn't blatant advertising, it is not promotional to create a Wikipedia article for a non-notable company that wants to raise their internet profile and search engine ranking. It's quite possible that this block has now finally got his attention. The degree to which his current promises are credible, I leave to the unblocking admin and those who are willing to supervise him. Voceditenore (talk) 12:40, 15 November 2012 (UTC)

@ Voceditenore. I think you misunderstood me. I registered with Wikipedia two years ago when I tried my ill-advised Matt Portman experiment, but I barely log in after that for over 16 months (as my contribution history will show). I already mentioned that I may have signed with Wikipedia two years ago, but I only started actively participating in this community four months ago. I think you're also unfair to say that I'm contending that that as long as the language itself isn't blatant advertising, it is not promotional to create a Wikipedia article for a non-notable company that wants to raise their internet profile and search engine ranking.

I don't think there is anywhere that I said anything to that effect. All I said was that it was harder to realize my mistake because no one pointed it out. And just to correct Nick, UssistMe wasn't turned down because it was spam. It was turned down because it was pointed out as non-notable--which is something I am more familiar with.

My explanations seem to be keep on being twisted as rants of denial.

The past three days I haven't been trying to say that my actions were right. I have been trying to apologize for them, and explain the errors that led me in that direction.

I admitted that I was wrong and even gave an overview of my mistakes. I believe that is why this window was provided to me. So why is that such a bad thing?

Orphaned non-free media (File:Nialaya logo.png)

Thanks for uploading File:Nialaya logo.png. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media 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 media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hazard-Bot (talk) 04:16, 11 November 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Marianna Biernacka for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marianna Biernacka 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/Marianna Biernacka 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 template from the top of the article. DGG ( talk ) 00:58, 12 November 2012 (UTC)