User talk:Brfallon

Jimmy Scott interview

As I told you on my talk page, baseball players give countless numbers of interviews during their lives. One interview isn't notable enough to be included in an article. Jackal4 (talk) 01:27, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. Thanks for responding. Howabout if I include a fact from the interview on the article? Also, since you know a lot more about Wikipedia, would you happen to know why the links to the Durbin entry were reversed? The history says they were reverting non-notable TW links when I tried linking it to the interview. Thanks!Brfallon (talk) 01:52, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Including facts from the interview would be fine. As for Durbin, it might be better if you added what his business is about. Jackal4 (talk) 01:58, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brfallon, another reason why your edits may have been reverted is because all of them have been in reference to a specific website. From my perspective, the only reason you are editing is to promote the website, see WP:SPAM. Also, blogs are not typically considered reliable sources. Ah, I see you've asked a question on my page. I hope this answers your question and lets you know where I am coming from. — X96lee15 (talk) 20:36, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Alright. I see what you are saying. You took out the Jimmy Scott interview link because it doesn't support the statement. If you listen to the interview, and I am not trying to promote it, but if you do listen to it you will hear Jason Grilli himself talk about Perfect Pitch Marketing. Throwing SPAM around is not on my list of things to do, but I am trying to promote the interview site through Wikipedia just as it is being promoted through Facebook and Myspace. So, is there anyway of keeping these links up assuming I refer to Jimmy Scott's interview with the article's subject and mention pertinent information from said interview in the statement and link them?Brfallon (talk) 21:12, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Jackal4

FYI, Jackal4 has been blocked for the second time this month -- this time for a 30-day period. See [1].--Epeefleche (talk) 08:12, 14 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]