User talk:Carltonjim
|
February 2010
[edit]Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Corsair Memory has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.youtube.com/corsairmemoryinc (matching the regex rule \byoutube\.com). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. Video links are also strongly deprecated by our guidelines for external links, partly because they're useless to people with slow internet connections.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Civility Award | ||
Thanks for your positive, pleasant, and understanding response at User talk:XLinkBot about these links. If every editor were as thoughtful and kind as you are, then Wikipedia would be a better and happier place. WhatamIdoing (talk) 04:25, 9 February 2010 (UTC) |
Corsair
[edit]I was going to ask you why you removed the city in this edit, but then I saw you are the VP of marketing. :)
One thing to keep in mind in your situation is the conflict of interest. In your case, it is good that you declared your association on your user page. Just be sure to follow "Verifiability" guidelines. Thanks for your help!--intelatitalk 19:30, 4 November 2010 (UTC)
Corsair Memory page needs some help
[edit]I appreciate that you disclosed you are associated with Corsair Memory. I think you are doing a pretty good job so far not getting tangled in any WP:CoI issues. Recently someone tagged the article for possible speedy deletion due to the advertising aspect of the article. The lack of alternate sources to all the various statements is not helping. If you had an opportunity to locate some sources and possibly add them to the various paragraphs that would help the article stay active and not get deleted. I will also do what I can to help keep it from getting deleted. Remember that the talk page is a legitimate place for you to make suggestions for changes so other neutral editors can make them for you and assume no COI and keep a WP:NPOV. § Music Sorter § (talk) 05:57, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback
[edit]Well, this is an issue for companies on Wikipedia in general... just discussing who you are and what you make is inevitably viewed as advertising some segment of the wikipedia community. I cleaned up the original user generated content, framed it with some history of the company, added the brand names because people want to know what our products are, and have generally tried to keep it informational rather than advertorial. Granted, it's not encyclopaedic, exactly, but it's at least factual.
Frankly, I wouldn't care if the page went away but I'm sure that the entry would just be recreated by one or more of our more enthusiastic fans. Personally, I don't see a lot of need for company pages in wikipedia, but the community continues to add them so they must feel there is some value. Carltonjim (talk) 19:15, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
- I know what you mean. :-) As for your most recent edits, I would actually say the prior version had a bit more interesting content that gave the entry a less advertorial feel. The comment about how the case was different and when it was first announced is part of what helps separate the spam from the good articles. That whole product section should not be under their own headings unless there is some kind of story behind each product. That is what it needs to be though. Are there any online sources you can point to that talks about any of these products I could spin into little one paragraph stories as to why they are in the portfolio? § Music Sorter § (talk) 06:49, 29 July 2011 (UTC)