User talk:MOverly

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

MOverly[edit]

Welcome![edit]

Hello, AlphaVictorSierraIndiaGolf, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! NtheP (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG)[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. NtheP (talk) 21:15, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

February 2013[edit]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. Please read the following carefully.
Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.

Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

Probably not, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again.

What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you will probably not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:

  • Add the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} on your user talk page.
  • Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
  • Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
    • Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
    • Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 21:35, 9 February 2013 (UTC)

Nomination of The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG) for deletion[edit]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG) 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/The Aviation Special Interest Group (AVSIG) 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. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 20:56, 10 February 2013 (UTC)

Orologio verde.svg
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

MOverly (block logactive blocksglobal blocksautoblockscontribsdeleted contribsabuse filter logcreation logchange block settingsunblock)


Requested username:

Request reason:

Please advise if the act of contributing to this page constitutes spam and/or conflict of interest in every instance, as I am the admin of the subject forum. Thanks, Mike Overly

Accept reason:

Allowing username change to requested username. Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 22:14, 22 February 2013 (UTC)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

Here are a few key questions:

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. Daniel Case (talk) 16:38, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I have read and believe I reasonably understand all three above-referenced sections (NOTDIRECTORY, COI, WP:GNG). I would appreciate continued review of the original entry for self promotion and notability if these areas are in question regarding this article. Thanks, Mike Overly

So, considering WP:COI, what kind of articles do you intend to edit if unblocked and permitted to change your username. I see that the "article" is being heavily edited by others with COI as we speak (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:50, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
My professional and personal interests are in aviation, automotive, bicycling, and literature and I would likely stay in those domains. I think a word is missing in your above statement "I see that the "article" is being [Missing Word] heavily by others with COI as we speak." Could you please fill-in that blank? Thanks, Mike Overly
The missing word was obviously "edited" (although it could have been "screwed up via editing") as I have added above. Please note, you must sign all talkpage posts with ~~~~ (✉→BWilkins←✎) 19:17, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

I thought it might be "edit." I'm probably missing something, but on the "View History" page I only see edits from one user apart from you, and that user is Msrasnw, who so far as I know has no connection our forum. For that matter I would anticipate that if this page survives your review process there will at some point in the future be members of our forum who will attempt to edit the page. These people are strictly users of the forum who are not compensated in any way ... enthusiasts, if you will. Would their association as readers and posters to the forum constitute a COI in regard to page editing? Thanks ... ~~~~ (✉→ (Mike Overly)

One doesn't have to be paid to have a conflict of interest - all they have to do is edit in a way that prioritizes the forum over Wikipedia. If they don't edit to promote the forum, then they aren't having a conflict of interest (though it's still best practices for them to declare they're forumites there). As an aside, it's Alfa. —Jeremy v^_^v Bori! 20:12, 14 February 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for the clarification. There is not much hyperbole in this group, so I don't anticipate issues. (✉→ (AlphaVictorSierraIndiaGolf) Mike Overly

Regarding the user "Msrasnw," who has contributed the largest number of edits so far to the article in question, I don't know who he is, but his contributions page shows that he has made a lot of edits on topics unrelated to this one, in case that matters. I, on the other hand, have been an Avsig member for years, although I haven't been very active there lately. Obviously I heard about this controversy there, but my main interest in this is to provide whatever information I can to enable Wikipedia to make an informed decision. I do hope it will not be a hasty decision. --Palmpilot900 (talk) 04:12, 15 February 2013 (UTC)

Msrasnw, it's pretty obvious based on a mere cursory glance at my talkpage that I was not talking about you. Seriously. However, go back to that thread you created without havign done the research and you'll see my reply that links to the part of my talkpage I'm referring to (✉→BWilkins←✎) 10:30, 15 February 2013 (UTC)
Dear Bwilkins sorry for my confusion I had thought since I seemed to by the only editor who had edited the article since you Afd it when you said that it was being heavily edited by a COI editor who was screwwing up the article you might have meant me. I think in these circumstance you might understand this was an obvious mistake for me to make. I guess you are accusing ‎Jack Hammond but I think he has not edited the article or screwed it up. (Msrasnw (talk) 11:52, 15 February 2013 (UTC))
  • I have been a Wikipedia editor for about ten years. Having seen the way Mike has conducted the Avsig forum over the years, I'm certain that his choice of user name was not a result of sinister intent. I've been a pilot for over twenty years, and I know for a fact that Mike has a lot to contribute on the subject of aviation. If you don't want to take my word for it, a Google search shows that he has been quoted in the press many times over the years on the subject of aviation safety. For these reasons, I think that permanently blocking him would not be in Wikipedia's best interests. --Palmpilot900 (talk) 22:09, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
Typically, blocking anyone permanently is not in Wikipedia's interests. This account name is because it matches the initials of the primary area of interest. He'll be unblocked in order to change usernames as soon as the community is convinced the WP:COI issues, etc are acknowledged. For example, the founder of Wikipedia himself recently reminded COI editors that they should only be editing the talkpage of the article they have COI with (✉→BWilkins←✎) 23:06, 16 February 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks for the clarification. --Palmpilot900 (talk) 23:46, 16 February 2013 (UTC)

Question for Admins: Is Mike Overly (User:AlphaVictorSierraIndiaGolf) required to do anything in order to be unblocked or is it that we waiting for some decision from elsewhere? (Msrasnw (talk) 15:28, 19 February 2013 (UTC))

We're waiting for him to respond, as per my message a couple of lines above this - in fact, it's been more than 3 days that we have been waiting for a response, and typically that leads to a procedural decline. I'd do it myself, but as I'm the blocking admin, I wouldn't want someone to mistakenly believe I was declining inappropriately (✉→BWilkins←✎) 15:37, 19 February 2013 (UTC)
I think it is not clear that you were waiting for a further response from him. This is perhaps due to my having made a mess here by having wrongly felt accussed by you. Perhaps we should just try to make it clear what is wanted as I think he might have thought he had done this already. My understanding now is you just want him to clearly "acknowledge" the WP:COI issues and perhaps implicit is that that you also want a promiss to only edit the talkpage of any article he has COI with. Is that right? (I apologise if I am appearing dumb some of us struggle sometimes with these sorts of things) (Msrasnw (talk) 15:58, 19 February 2013 (UTC))
If Mike has been reading this page and has trouble understanding the requirements then he can ask for clarification. It is indeed the posts from others that have made a mess out of this, and why extraneous questions/comments should have been made elsewhere. If you guys have confused Mike, then really that's your fault - Mike can ask his own clarification if it's not obvious - although you do seem to have hit the nail fairly squarely on the head. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 16:57, 19 February 2013 (UTC)

Apologies for all this trouble, folks. Do I understand correctly that my input on a COI page like AVSIG should be limited to discussion on that article's Talk page? And if that is the case I'm assuming that a non-COI editor monitoring that Talk page would then elect to act or not on article edits based on that Talk discussion? If that is the case, all understood -- if I have misconstrued, please someone speak up. Many thanks to everyone who has helped straighten-out my clumsy debut in WikiLand. Msrasnw: I am impressed by the clickable dead tree cites you found for AVSIG -- I've got a bunch to learn. (✉→ (Mike Overly)

Your submission at WP:CHUS[edit]

It does not appear to be properly formatted, and as such, prevented your submission from showing up on the submission page. Remember that when submitting a CHU/S request, ensure that the template is enclosed like this: {{}}. Thank you, hmssolent\Let's convene My patrols 05:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)