User talk:T3dkjn89q00vl02Cxp1kqs3x7

Managing a conflict of interest

Hi there, the page I am creating is from a neutral standpoint with verified url references - in no ways promotional. Please check and reconsider instead of just deleting the entire page without any found basis. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Keikonobumoto (talk • contribs) 04:06, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest

Thank you Logical Cowboy, actually I am in no way affiliated with the pages I am editing, I wish I was, I had my master thesis about the Mouawad Heritage and Group and I found them and their expansion fascinating that I thought they needed to be on Wikipedia. Thank you. Wikiyamo (talk) 13:50, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

The pages you are editing have had heavy involvement by paid editors, who have mostly been blocked for their violations of Wikipedia rules such as using multiple accounts. Someone is paying people to edit these articles. Maybe it is a shame you are not being paid! Good luck with your scholarly efforts. Logical Cowboy (talk) 14:00, 8 August 2014 (UTC)

Concerns

Logical Cowboy, saw you had some concerns. Will exercise caution. I live in the same island as Warren Cassell Jr and have met him a few times. I'm just a big fan of the young man and want to support him however I can. However, I will refrain from editing the page again. I did not mean to violate any terms. Caribbeanbio (talk) 10:00, 9 August 2014 (EST)

A Barnstar For You

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your outstanding SPI work! Anna Frodesiak (talk) 02:34, 12 August 2014 (UTC)

coi, etc

I'll be very glad to follow up on your removal of promotional content anywhere you think it might need help. (I use the same approach as you--successive edits, not usually one drastic cut unless it's so bad I lose patience) Sometimes two editors doing it helps to make it stick. Just let me know on my talk p. DGG ( talk ) 05:54, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion

Although you shouldn't re-add CSD tags that have been declined, if you discover another speedy deletion criterion applies, there's no reason not to request speedy deletion under that other criterion. Personally, I have no interest in enforcing G5 where the behaviour isn't disruptive, but someone else will probably be willing to look into it. WilyD 08:35, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

Hi, can you please review this page: Mikhail Batin? 185.25.95.132 (talk) 10:56, 20 September 2014 (UTC)

Bebuzee

Hi,

I declined speedy deletion here because I couldn't see evidence that the user the same person you said he/she was. If I'm missing something please, drop a line on my talk.

--Tóraí (talk) 23:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)

Sea life "artists" gone wild...

Hi Logical Cowboy. I decided to check out Robert Lyn Nelson's "competitors" on WP and found this little beauty. UGH! Fixed now and stern note left on talk page, but you might want to put it on your watchlist too. Wyland's folk may not be too happy with the result. Best, Voceditenore (talk) 15:30, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

COI

Hi Logical. The article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Waterford_Harbour_Sailing_Club is about a club of which I am a member. I tried to make it unbiased and neutral. Perhaps you could explain where the problem is and I will be happy to adjust it? Nmwalsh (talk) 13:18, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Well, you certainly give the appearance of a paid editor. You have created several promotional articles, for a variety of companies or organizations, that were declined. You have repeatedly added promotional material to Grupo Vidanta, an article with heavy involvement of paid editing. The "problem" is that Wikipedia is not the place to promote your projects, especially when you are paid to do so. There are policies on conflict of interest, like WP:PLAINANDSIMPLECOI, but really I think it would be best if you just stopped writing promotional articles altogether. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:09, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

Charles Corm

Kindly stop reverting my edits to Charles Corm. I'm not a blocked editor, so I don't undertsnad your problem. Neither was the image added by Newzealand123 (even if it was, this wouldn't be a reason to remove the image). I'm trying to improve the article and remove some of the grander unsourced claims. An image of one of Corm's publications does no harm. Sionk (talk) 16:24, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I have responded on the article talk page, that is the place for this discussion. Although I have great respect for your contributions to WP, I think it is unfortunate that some of your recent work has been to aggressively push forward the efforts of COI editors, e.g., on Charles Corm and here [1]. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:41, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

That's utter rubbish and you must surely know it. I'm trying (and have been trying since early this year) to remove and reword any promotional editing to this (and other articles) by Corm's grandson. Your suggestion that I am a supporter of these COI editors is deliberately provocative, offensive and unconstructive.

I just don't have any truck with editors who enjoy wielding the big stick at the first whiff of COI, throwing the good out with the bad. Sionk (talk) 19:15, 11 September 2014 (UTC)

I don't think you are part of the Newzealand123 sock farm, but you sure are acting like you are. For example, you deleted COI tags from two paid articles written/edited by Newzealand123, here [2] and here [3]. You falsely claimed that "Klokus and Newzealand123 haven't edited" Charles Corm [4] even though she obviously had [5]. You falsely claimed that I gave "no apparent reason" for deleting a picture [6], putting this directly below the reason I had just given [7]. That is a disruptive version of WP:IDHT, to deny there is a reason given when the reason is given right there. The nonsensical reason that you gave for reverting my deletion is that "It is still on Wikipedia with no deletion request." In other words, you reverted my deletion of the picture because you said it is not deleted yet. Anyway, this belongs on the article talk page--we should be talking about the article, not about my big stick. Please do not respond here. Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:39, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Check your facts and stop being disruptive and POINTY. Robert Lyn Nelson was written by TonySinclair1. Charles Corm was written by TheBlueFlamingo. Klokus's only edit to Charles Corm was 28 June 2014 to add two images that have been legitimately uploaded to Wikipedia. The Robert Lyn Nelson article has never been edited by Klokus so I don't see your point at all.

Try addressing the actual issues of the articles, rather than minor (alleged) historical paid editing. Sionk (talk) 18:00, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

Again, please do not respond here, please discuss this on the article talk page. Your comments are not very careful. E.g., the Klokus images were not uploaded legitimately, they were uploaded in evasion of a block. See WP:IDHT. Robert Lyn Nelson was not edited by Klokus, it was edited by a different sockpuppet of Newzealand123. I suggest you look at the whole case, here [8]. Logical Cowboy (talk) 18:06, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm discussing you edits, so here seems sensible. Sionk (talk) 18:11, 12 September 2014 (UTC)

We have a disagreement, which won't be solved by being patronising. Sionk (talk) 15:41, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Sockmaster

Hi Logical Cowboy. I saw you reverted some edits at Draft:SP Studios because you said they were made by a sockpuppteer, Newzealand123. Should that be added to the investigations case page? --Drm310 (talk) 16:41, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

That's an interesting question. CheckUser said that User:AudioGuy88 is a sock of blocked editor User:Newzealand123. This information appears here User:AudioGuy88 and here [9]. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:46, 2 October 2014 (UTC)

AfD Opinion

I've modified the page Murat Pak - what do you think now? I would love it to survive so I'd love to hear your opinions on it's current state.--Gnihton (talk) 07:17, 4 October 2014 (UTC)

My Edit

Why you reverted my edit on Grupo Vidanta page. There is reliable references available to support this edit.37.238.180.159 (talk) 19:46, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

Please read WP:CRYSTAL. Logical Cowboy (talk) 22:10, 7 October 2014 (UTC)

FYI

User talk:Materialscientist#User:Sami Abboud and User talk:Sami Abboud. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 11:09, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Jay Postal

There are some indications, such as from the MTV source, that this DJ may be notable. Bearian (talk) 21:03, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

The MTV page is self written. It's like LinkedIn. Logical Cowboy (talk) 01:09, 24 October 2014 (UTC)

Marko Stout

Marko Stout is an interesting one. Created by an experienced editor User:BiH. Widefox; talk 16:42, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

In order not to duplicate myself, my response is on my talk page. --BiH (talk) 17:06, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Proposed Deletion Feedback

our feedback in this discussion would be greatly appreciated. Warren Cassell, Jr. is up for deletion. Can you share your thoughts in the discussion? Caribbeanbio (talk) 03:26, 9 November 2014 (UTC)

Khalilah Rose

Hie, i would appreciate if you would help me improve this article. I have disclosed my COI on both my talk page and the article's talk page. I also posted it on the COI board however since you have a personal interest in this page, i am reaching out to you so you can tell me what exactly is still promotional about it. I stuck to the facts, cited all of the nominations / awards, removed headers that looked like signs of advertizing and i did not add my personal opinions or be flattering in any way. Can you please look it over so i can improve it further? Best Lilianarice (talk) 14:13, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

How much were you paid to write the article? I'll split the money with you. Logical Cowboy (talk) 16:05, 13 November 2014 (UTC)

Here is to let you know that i have reported this extortion activityLilianarice (talk) 14:04, 16 November 2014 (UTC) There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

COI

You may be interested in perfecting the profile of this Russian politician Mikhail Batin 191.96.248.208 (talk) 09:21, 27 November 2014 (UTC)

Re-creation

Since I don;t know its the same person, I listed it for MfD; someone will probably check and speedy it. DGG ( talk ) 16:08, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Some might say that due to WP:EVASION, it does not matter "who" the person is, when re-posting the same work as the blocked editor. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:11, 1 December 2014 (UTC)

True, but I'm very cautious about anything involving spi. DGG ( talk ) 05:15, 3 December 2014 (UTC)

Article nominated for Speedy Deletion

I am a new contributor to Wikipedia and just read this article http://searchengineland.com/open-letter-to-wikipedia-editors-yes-matt-cutts-is-notable-10216 and it seems that Wikipedia is not clearly following its own guidelines which is making it difficult to apply common standards. Another example in this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rahul_Mewawalla that you nominated for speedy deletion - "This article may meet Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion as a page that was previously deleted via a deletion discussion, is substantially identical to the deleted version, and any changes do not address the reasons for which the material was deleted. See the previous discussion. See CSD G4." I wonder if the previous discussion was actually reviewed before making this judgement. The previous deletion, came down, to 2 comments - "lack of coverage in something like Wall Street Journal or CNN" and "not seeing the subject covered when searched in Google News." As a test, I did the same tests again, and the subject of the article has now been featured in major publications including the 2 that were specifically mentioned by the editor earlier - has been featured in both Wall Street Journal and CNN, not to mention Forbes, FastCompany, TechCrunch, Harvard Business Review etc. I also did a Google News search and the subject comes up in over 20 publications etc. So I'd request you to please do the same and see if you may change your judgement. If not, then please go ahead and just delete article per speedy deletion. Walesgreens (talk) 21:44, 3 January 2015 (UTC) Thanks. —  (talk • contribs) Walesgreens (talk) 22:25, 3 January 2015 (UTC)

Talk regarding topic

Hello, I am fan of Erik Daniel Shein,I was reading his novels, that's why i want that his article stick on Wikipedia, I have some link regarding himself, please suggest me what can i do, so his article is stick on Wikipedia. thanks & regards ManishVyas1747

February 2015

I noticed the message you recently left to Vishal1811. Please remember not to bite the newcomers. If you see someone make a common mistake, try to politely point out what they did wrong and how to correct it. Thank you. Hirolovesswords (talk) 17:04, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

Although I welcome your contributions to WP, in this case you are poorly informed. This article was written by a paid editor, commissioned on the f****r.com website. Logical Cowboy (talk) 17:39, 16 February 2015 (UTC)

February 2015

Hello Logical Cowboy, This is regarding your message for not to add inappropriate external links as we did to the page Meditation. We added the link to the section "Further reading" and not to the "External links" section. The Further reading section already has many book references including one autobiograpy, so it appeard appropriate to add a related book link there. Please let us know how can we link back to this page. Thanks. Srihariom (talk) 21:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

I didn't think it was sufficiently related. The article is about mediation but that is not the main topic of the book. This seems more of a way to send links to Amazon's page for a new book that is on sale. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:19, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello Logical Cowboy, This came as a surprise as I am not affiliated with any of the people, places or things that I have written about in the article Om Swami. There is no external relationship - personal, religious, political, academic, financial or legal. I read the relavent policies and guidelines but don't see how this article is being affected. Can you please guide as to which sections need modifications. Thanks. Srihariom (talk) 21:23, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Your user page

Hello Logical Cowboy, I am not sure if I understand this message. How the user page redirect works? I am not sure if unknowingly there is any connection, so please give some more information on how to fix this. Are you asking if I am Om Swami? (I wish) No I am not. Thanks Srihariom (talk) 21:29, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Deleted redirect per request. Logical Cowboy (talk) 23:16, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Om Swami page

G'day mate. I see you've reverted my changes (deletion of tags) on the Om Swami page. Based on the revision history of this page and review by other administrators, as a reader, I don't see which parts in the article require improving it as per the tags. I'll be happy to help if you can be bit more specific. 10:15, 1 March 2015 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 171.78.22.115 (talk)

Om Swami

The article has been revised to address the issues currently raised by the tags. I have previously responded to some of the tags here on your talk page, as well as on the article's talk page. I am happy to respond to all the concerns here. I request you to review the article again as many changes were made to it after it was tagged. Please do let me know if there is anything specific that is required in the article in order for the tags to be removed. 1. The inline citations have been used throughout the article referencing the verifiable sources. 2. I have no personal, religious, political, academic, financial, or legal external relationship or connection with the subject. 3. The article has been revised to adhere to Wikipedia’s neutral point of view guidelines and currently represents views that have been published by verifiable reliable sources regarding the subject. 4. The subject is a notable published author of the book If Truth Be Told, published by Harper Collins in 2014. As per Wikipedia’s general notability guidelines, the subject has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject. The subject and his work have been published in various articles in leading newspapers. Regards, Srihariom (talk) 18:08, 1 March 2015 (UTC)

March 2015

Hi Logical Cowboy, I have added this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agrahayana to de-orphan the article. I apologize as I forgot to put the edit summary after making the changes. I shall keep that in mind for future. I have also added an additional inline citation to google books https://books.google.ca/books?id=WQ6iBQAAQBAJ&pg=PT112#v=onepage&q&f=false. Please let me know if this is sufficient. Regards, Srihariom (talk) 15:52, 3 March 2015 (UTC)