User talk:Cupids wings

Welcome!

Hello, Cupids wings, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! The Rambling Man (talk) 14:42, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thanks! there's just so much information in here, it's amazing!

System requirements

Yes, it is necessary to list requirements. People need to know requirements, even if they are low. Dogru144 (talk) 23:40, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(DriveSentry) Written like an Advert

Dear Cupids Wings, I see that you have placed 'written like an advert' and 'this page is an advert' template banners on a few company/product description pages. A recent page that has received a template from you is DriveSentry. I am interested in why you think the page is written like an advert? The page has been edited many times in the past to satisfy other editors opinions, Wikipedia guidelines and is of similar style to similar companies, but maybe the page requires further modification what do you suggest? Mike A Quinn (talk) 13:24, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, it doesn't so much look like an advert as an advert masquerading as an article (aka spam) (see Wikipedia:SPAM#Advertisements_masquerading_as_articles). The only "other editors", as yourself, clearly look as though they have some vested interest in this product. Please see Wikipedia:COI, etc

Rather than afd'ing it, which I'd normally do, I've tried to help out by changing the article to make it more neutral.

Looking back at the edits I've put in, the article has shrunk somewhat as a result - please don't be offended by this - as it states at the bottom when you submit an edit: "If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed for profit by others, do not submit it!". This is mainly due to a number of things though:

Overview - versions and dates moved to infobox
Technology section - simplified. This is full of marketing waffle. e.g. the number of AV signatures isn't particularly meaningful, and gives a false impression to readers; "Tri-Security" is just a marketing term for the different lists
Products section - Removed/merged with other sections. Is this article about the company, or the free AV product? I've removed references to GoAnywhere in particular (and in other sections) - from its description, this is a separate (commercial) product, and it would make make more sense for it to have its own page. In the article's previous state, it's as though you're trying to mix the free product up with the commercial product - which does misrepresent things.
Requirements section - not encyclopedic, nor particularly notable, given what the requirements are, and that the overwhelming majority of PCs these days meet these. Windows 2000 minimum requirement moved to infobox.
Reception - more GoAnyware (see above). Also the "where you can buy GoAnywhere" element - from Currys!, Currys Digital! (aka Currys) and PC World! - is just pure spam! It's not as though DriveSentry's the only AV software they stock! I've kept in the more relevant parts though (e.g. PC World supplying the free product preloaded on PCs). The checkmark certification is interesting - a number of Wiki articles mention this, but there's no article on though.

One other suggestion; you might want to make it clear on both your talk page, and the DriveSentry talk page, your involvement in this software. Cupids wings (talk) 19:17, 24 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Cupid wings,

Thank you for your editing time,

I know of one other editor who calls herself bluubar. The product does get a good reception in some of the security blogging posts by users of the product so I suspect these are people who are also editing the page. However the article has received many edits from people who for sure work for competitive products.

Thank you for taking the time to edit the article which I can assure you has not been written with intent as an advertisement, the article has deliberately highlighted to the reader the 3 external links to our site and does not in anyway try to persuade a reader to visit the site.

Thank you also for removing the marketing waffle. However I think you were a bit heavy handed with GoAnywhere so I may add a little back in to explain an item or two this time without the marketing waffle.

FYI our products are free to use BUT a user can add additional paid for add on’s so like Skype I need to change our licence to ‘Freeware (with some paid feature)’

Reception – OK and I hope someone will add links to some of the more recent interesting articles that DriveSentry has been included in.

Thanks again. Mike A Quinn (talk) 08:57, 27 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Cupids wings. You have new messages at User talk:Dank55/Apr.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

More info - Dan Dank55 (push to talk) 19:26, 21 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

are you drive by tagging every software article there is?

How exactly do you consider Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware to be spam? Many long time editors have worked on it. Most of the article is the review section, listing what people have said about it. There are plenty of references. It list what it does, and what reviewers have said of it, and nothing more. Dream Focus 15:45, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I tag spam as spam, simple as that.

If you bother to check my edit history, you'll realise that the overwhelming number of articles I tag for deletion go on to get deleted - either summarily by admin who agree with my assessment, or after going through the AFD process, where the majority of editors agree with me and the consensus is to delete.

I marked "Malwarebytes' Anti-Malware" for deletion as it's nothing more than an advert for a software product. It consists of a single paragraph outlining what it does, followed by a "reception" section which only has links to very brief byline mentions on a few WWW sites. None of which regard it as particularly noteworthy software product compared to it's competition, or give any meaningful comparison to other antivirus products.

However, am I always constructive in my editing, and two other editors feel it's worth keeping, then fair enough. I've modified it to be more neutral by removing a couple of references which will certainly have been obsoleted by now (competing antivirus products typically release new signatures daily; sometimes hourly), collapsing two references to removing MS Antivirus (malware), and balancing things out with a new section Cupids wings (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Coffee Cup HTML Editor 2007.GIF

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Coffee Cup HTML Editor 2007.GIF. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:14, 14 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]