User talk:Danieldis47

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Hello Danieldis47, and Welcome to Wikipedia!Bouncywikilogo.gif

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page — I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

Danieldis47, good luck, and have fun. --NickContact/Contribs 22:40, 19 April 2010 (UTC)


Pleas be cautious doing paid editing on Wikipedia, and bear in mind the conflict of interest policy. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:33, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Understood, and thank you for the advice. Danieldis47 (talk) 17:41, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Archimedes, Inc. for deletion[edit]

Ambox warning pn.svg

A discussion has begun about whether the article Archimedes, Inc., which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Archimedes, Inc. until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article.--res Laozi speak 13:47, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Archimedes logo 220 42.jpg[edit]


Thanks for uploading File:Archimedes logo 220 42.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, 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

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:Image copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:Image 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. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 01:19, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from canvassing[edit]

Information.svg Hello. It appears that you have been canvassing—leaving messages on others' talk pages to notify them of an ongoing community decision, debate, or vote. While friendly notices are allowed, they should be limited and nonpartisan in distribution and should reflect a neutral point of view. Please do not post notices which are indiscriminately cross-posted, which espouse a certain point of view or side of a debate, or which are selectively sent only to those who are believed to hold the same opinion as you. Remember to respect Wikipedia's principle of consensus-building by allowing decisions to reflect the prevailing opinion among the community at large.--res Laozi speak 03:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the notice. As you can see, my messages are entirely non-partisan and neutral, and they total only four in number. I do not know these editors and I have no idea what their opinions on anything are. They are simply the editors who made some edit(s) to the Archimedes, Inc. page. Danieldis47 (talk) 03:21, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

It is appropriate to notify users who have made substantial edits, like the anon IP. Notifying everyone in the edit history, even if their edit is as minor as a typo correction, is disruptive. I understand your frustration that your article is being nominated for deletion, but please refrain from breaking behaviour guidelines.--res Laozi speak 03:25, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Hello again, my shadow! It seems that the only person I have disrupted is you! So sorry! Danieldis47 (talk) 03:33, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Please keep this discussion on your talk page or on the AfD discussion, I don't want this to be a race to have the last word on multiple pages. I understand your frustrations, but I hope this discussion will remain civil, and not spread across the talk pages of very minorly involved users. --res Laozi speak 03:57, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
And yet, you do give every appearance of wanting to have all the last words. Curious! I know you have kept yourself very busy, and that must be frustrating. Civilly yours, Danieldis47 (talk) 04:06, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Please, let's let the issue go, you had your last words on the AfD, we should move on. Let me emphasise, I understand the frustration of seeing one's own article nominated for deletion. I harbour no ill will towards you, and hopefully we can resolve this issue through calm and rational discourse.--res Laozi speak 04:30, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

A note[edit]

I think we've got off to a bad start. I'd like to apologise and turn over a new leaf with you, because I think this is getting a little too personal. In the interest of being open, have you ever edited on behalf of any organisation or 'for' any organisation, even unpaid? If so, which articles? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 04:00, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Sadly, apology not accepted. Thanks! Danieldis47 (talk) 04:10, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
Let's put it another, firmer way: I'm seriously concerned that you're editing on behalf of a person, company or organisation and that you are actively obfuscating that fact to prevent Wikipedia policies and processes from being carried out properly. I am giving you the chance to declare whether or not you have you ever edited on behalf of another person, company or organisation, to 'declare your biases', if you will - as I declare mine on my userpage. Are you willing to declare the third parties you have edited for or on behalf of? Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
All of my edits are available for any party to scrutinize as they please. I write the best, Wikipedia-guideline-following articles (and edits to other articles) that I can. I appreciate the input of the Wikipedia community of editors in helping to make sure that those articles are done correctly and well. I appreciate and share your wish to make Wikipedia as bias-free as possible. (PS. I know of no requirement that Wikipedia editors declare their interests...) Be well! Danieldis47 (talk) 04:42, 16 November 2010 (UTC)
  1. It seems to me that your account exists for the sole or primary purpose of promoting persons, companies, products, services, or organizations.
  2. Four of your articles are up for deletion because the community thinks they have violated our guidelines for inclusion and our NPOV, SPAM and COI policies. One editor who has been here for five years and amassed 65,000 edits has even put forward the opinion that you are creating walled gardens of non-neutral, non-notable articles. The rest of your articles show a pattern of editing on behalf of your employer.
  3. I have made you aware of the Conflict of Interest guideline and you have continued to promote said persons by involving yourself in the deletion discussions and refusing to acknowledge that you have any conflict of interest. This is considered 'disruption'.
You have already admitted that this account is linked to your Twitter account, thereby disclosing your name. This has led me to a copy of your résumé which indicates that the majority of your edits were made purely to advance your clients, or on behalf of your employer. I am therefore blocking your account indefinitely, as I do not believe you are here to improve our project - instead, you are here to use it to advance your own agenda. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 05:18, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

November 2010[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used mainly for spamming or advertising. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 05:19, 16 November 2010 (UTC)