User talk:Informationnest

February 2010

Welcome!

Hello, Informationnest, 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:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

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 on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Avic enna sis 05:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of J G Wentworth & Associates

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on J G Wentworth & Associates, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of J G Wentworth & Associates and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Avic enna sis 05:43, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

You must provide independent reliable sources for your claims in the article J G Wentworth & Associates. Without credible claims, the article may be deleted under speedy deletion criterion G10, an unsourced negative article. —C.Fred (talk) 06:06, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: I read the article and deleted it twice. The first time was because you provided no references. The second was for the same reason and it was also a copyright violation since you copied the single source's entire content into the article. As C.Fred pointed out to you, you must provide independent reliable sources for your claims in the article. And with such extraordinary claims and disparaging phrases that you used (please see our neutral point of view policy), multiple reliable sources are critical. I suggest that you work on the article in your user space. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:23, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I would go one step further in this case and suggest working on the article offline, in the text editor/word processor of your choice on your computer. Do not bring the draft onto Wikipedia—mainspace or user space—until you have a good set of sources in place. —C.Fred (talk) 06:27, 26 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

J.G. Wentworth

There seems to be a disagreement in how to move ahead with this page. I have put in a Request for Comment from the community. Could you please join the conversation at the J.G. Wentworth talk page. Also, remember to sign your comments by using the four tildes Thanks XinJeisan (talk) 22:51, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

March 2010

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User:Valterre. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Please don't mess with other users' user pages; leave it for the talk page. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 03:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 04:35, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

J.G. Wentworth

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on J.G. Wentworth. Note that the three-revert rule prohibits making more than three reversions on a single page within a 24-hour period. Additionally, users who perform several reversions in content disputes may be blocked for edit warring even if they do not technically violate the three-revert rule. When in dispute with another editor you should first try to discuss controversial changes to work towards wording and content that gains a consensus among editors. Should that prove unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. Please stop the disruption, otherwise you may be blocked from editing. XinJeisan (talk) 08:32, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your talk page edits at J.G. Wentworth

Wikipedia has rules about civility and refraining from making personal attacks on other editors, such as accusing another editor of working for J. G. Wentworth as a means of discrediting his editing on the article. Please try to focus on discussing article content, not on other peoples' conduct. Also, when you add a new section to an article's talk page, please place it at the bottom of the page. New sections are typically placed at the bottom of pages here, so if you place it at the top people aren't likely to see it. You have also violated the rule against reverting more than three times in a 24 hour period, which is a blockable offense. I won't be reporting you because it's not clear to me that you understood the consequences, but if you revert more than once today after this message, I won't hesitate to report you for it. — e. ripley\^talk 12:26, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Informationnest. You have new messages at Drmies's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Thanks for the message, I can see that you are frustrated. Wikipedia's rules can be difficult to understand for newcomers and it can be a confusing place to navigate. I can assure you that I will do everything I can to make sure that the article is balanced and complies with Wikipedia's core policies, which are designed to ensure the best article we can have. You should know, though, that Wikipedia articles are not the place to soapbox, and that an advocate such as yourself may chafe under the neutral point of view policies, not to mention the conflict of interest policies, which could arguably apply to you considering your position. I ask that you try to be open-minded and understand Wikipedia's mission and how its rules are intended to protect it. — e. ripley\^talk 16:05, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]