User talk:Brbngurl

Welcome!

Hello, Brbngurl, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 click here to ask for help here on your talk page and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! —BarrelProof (talk) 18:40, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comment on your edits

You seem to have just started editing, but your edits have a strong similarity to those of some editors that have appeared to perform biased editing in favor of The Sazerac Company and its products. I hope you are a new and different editor and will strive to keep Wikipedia WP:NEUTRAL. —BarrelProof (talk) 18:40, 11 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you're repeatedly removing the description of Fireball Cinnamon Whisky as a "liqueur" from that article (about a Sazerac product). This has been discussed previously on the talk page (Talk:Fireball Cinnamon Whisky). I strongly suggest discussing the topic there rather than just continuing to "edit war" about it. You also might want to look up the definition of liqueur and the definition of whisky (and perhaps take a look at this photo). Properly, something with a lot of sweeteners and flavouring in it is not really "whisky". It may be a whisky-based mixture, but it's not whisky. —BarrelProof (talk) 21:05, 30 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you have continued to make edits that appear biased toward presenting the Sazerac Company and its products in a positive light. However, I'm not here primarily to complain about that at the moment. I think some of your edits are improving the articles (although it seems possible that you have a WP:Conflict of interest, and some other editors might take issue with that more than I have thus far). But what I would like to say right now is this:

I suggest to be more careful about using appropriate phrasing and proper formatting for your edits, and try to learn more about Wikipedia's guidelines for editing (e.g., in regard to WP:QUOTEMARKS, the use of citation references, and perhaps WP:EDITORIALIZING.
It's a bit annoying that you never seem to reply when addressed here on your Talk page, and that you never seem to participate in Talk page discussions of the articles that you edit. You might learn something of value if you did, and it might lead to improvement of the articles that interest you.
I also notice that you're marking most of your recent edits as minor. You can find some guidelines about that in Help:Minor edit. Deciding what is minor and what is not is somewhat subjective, but your recent edits don't look to me like they should be marked as minor. Minor edits are things like "spelling corrections, formatting changes, or rearrangement of text without modification of content". Adding new statements of fact or changing the main picture that illustrates an article are not really minor changes.

—BarrelProof (talk) 22:03, 16 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

February 2015

Hello, I'm Binksternet. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Sazerac without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Binksternet (talk) 21:05, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Brbngurl. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Sazerac, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

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. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vapeur (talk • contribs) 13:06, 19 February 2015‎

A Dobos torte for you!

7&6=thirteen (☎) has given you a Dobos torte to enjoy! Seven layers of fun because you deserve it.

To give a Dobos torte and spread the WikiLove, just place {{subst:Dobos Torte}} on someone else's talkpage, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

7&6=thirteen (☎) 19:43, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]