User talk:FrequentTraveler100

July 2023

Hello, I'm Freedom4U. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Hotels.com seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. :3 F4U (they/it) 01:51, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Edits to Hotels.com

Hey -- welcome to Wikipedia. I want to make it clear that the changes to your edits haven't been about people editing on behalf of the company (which if it was the case, could get that company banned from editing), but about formatting and tone for the edits. I think what you're trying to include (sourced criticism of the changes) is actually a good thing, and should be worked in, which I did with my edit -- it just needs more work to be Wikipedia-appropriate. While a lot of company articles don't pull this off, we try to be neutral in our coverage of subjects, and talk about both the good and bad things in non-emotive terms. I've rewritten that section again to add that the source mentions these changes as being unusually large, and that it was criticised, in language considered appropriate for Wikipedia. I also noticed that the earlier part of the section seemed promotional in favour of the company, so I've reduced that too. Vaticidalprophet 15:43, 13 July 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation. I appreciate your effort to work with me. However, simply saying an “unusually large devaluation” and “a much greater degree than most loyalty programs” still seems euphemistic rather than accurate. It is well documented in the trade press that the “devaluation” was 80% and it applies to rooms booked and paid in advance under the terms of the previous award program. As such, I will propose a few changes again which I believe will meet Wiki standards. 2607:FB91:8CAB:CF5D:5D49:862D:45EB:416E (talk) 16:12, 14 July 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

Hello. Your recent edit appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. VViking_TalkEdits 17:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I am posting such articles now. Thank you. 47.204.56.149 (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi FrequentTraveler100! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you.--VViking_TalkEdits 19:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Doug Traub for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Doug Traub is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Doug Traub until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Dr vulpes (Talk) 02:59, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello Dr. Vulpes, thank you for taking the time to review my proposed Wikipedia article. I have made a comment on the discussion page, as I reviewed the Wikipedia policies and procedures very carefully before I took the time to post this piece. As you can see, the final page has nearly 20 sources of information from a universe where there are many more to choose from, but the window is closing as more and more of the citations are being closed off to nonsubscribers. I've read about the huge number of pages Wikipedia editors review each day, and it is astounding. But I think you may have pulled the trigger on a deletion call before I was able to post all the citations and links which I should have finished by tomorrow night (Jan. 8, 2024). Again thanks. Please take another look at the page and I think you will agree it more than qualifies by Wikipedia policies and guidelines. FrequentTraveler100 (talk) 04:36, 8 January 2024 (UTC)