User talk:Mean as custard/Archive

Hello, Mean as custard, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Kilmer-san (talk) 18:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC) Getting started Introduction The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia Finding your way around Table of contents Department directory Editing articles How to develop an article Manual of Style Getting help Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Where to ask a question Help pages New contributors' help page Article Wizard - a Wizard to help you create articles How you can help Contributing to Wikipedia Community Portal Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility

Kilmer-san (talk) 18:43, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

CloudSafe

• Hello Mean as Custard, could you please tell me why all added external references in CloudSafe were deleted? There was already a discussion about the article in Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2011_February_16 and now I added a few more references to the article. Now every single reference is deleted! Please, I would suggest you leave them in and we put the article up to discussion again, is that ok with you? Best, Roberto valerio (talk) 21:50, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• I now found your entry from 18 February 2011: In your opinion it was an "an unexplained list of external links" you deleted. But some other admins considered at least two links to be valid sources from well-known third parties. Please have a look again. Just deleting all links does not help me in completing the article to meet your standards. Best, Roberto valerio (talk) 22:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

• Seems you are quicker in deleting than in discussiong about it :) I moved the page back to private user space for now. I would really like to know what you want me to include to avoid further rejections. Best, Roberto valerio (talk)

Well, the bottom line is: you should not be writing the article at all, as you appear to be so closely connected with the subject - WP:COI applies. If the article was to reappear, I would expect to see it written by an unbiased editor from the point of view of independent, notable sources, rather than relying on the company's own promotional material. A simple list of third-party links is not sufficient; if they are significant then relevant content should be summarized in the article, quoting them as references. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:22, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

• Learning and reading more and more about Wikipedia I realize that WP:COI has a lot differentation on this subject. Yes, I agree on being affected by Close relationships, sure. I never hid that. Still, I see the article as written in a neutral way just to make sure the company and the service is represented - like a lot of other even way smaller hosting services are within Wikipedia. Why not adding a *Request edit*? It should be no problem to ask people to contribute - as soon as the article is on the main space for a few days. Who should I ask now to re-edit the article, since it is not even visible? Best, Roberto valerio (talk) 13:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

March 2011

Hello Mean as Custard, I noticed that you edited and removed nearly all of the content on the article about ETX Capital. You noted that I should tone down the promotional bits but it was merely reflecting whatever they were doing. I then checked other companies in the same industry and saw that their articles had far more promotional info. Please advise what bits of it you deemed as promotional so I could edit accordingly rather than the literal content removal that was done. Thank You. --Crude stuff (talk) 12:13, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

I removed all the bits I deemed as promotional, and no more. Some of the content might be acceptable if it was rewritten with less hyperbole and sourced from independent neutral references rather from the company's own promotional material. If other companies have similarly promotional content then feel free to edit them. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:45, 3 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello Mean as Custard, 2 days ago, I left a message below. After then, I updated the content but it has been removed again.

I think it has been composed of an unbiased and objective articles. Please, reconsider deleting the page and let me know what the problem is. You point out the part to be modified the section will be changed to offer.

Thank you.

[Previous message]

Hello Mean as Custard, "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samsung_Fire" I'm working hard on the article above. Recently you removed the edited article 'Samsung Fire' after I changed a few things and added lots of information. Information and photos are now the wrong content, the content is too poor condition as well. That is the reason why I have modified.

Re-edit the content and updates so please let me know if you have problems after review. Please let me know if the existing text is acceptable, and if not, what must be changed to fit within the guidelines. Based on your feedback I will do my best to fix.

Thank you for any constructive help you can provide.

Thank you,

A small amount of the edit looked all right (the infobox), as it was objective information. However the rest was completely unacceptable being purely promotional in tone, which is why it has been removed by another editor - see WP:Spam. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:36, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiMembers10

Hello Mean as Custard, Please reconsider deleting the user page SeneGence. I have removed advertising copy and unvalidated claims and descriptive adjectives to describe SeneGence products. It should now be an unbiased, objectional article about SeneGence International.

Thank you,

Michelle @ SeneGence (SeneGence (talk) 18:54, 23 February 2011 (UTC))

hello Mean as Custard why did you remove my facebook and my youtube links and also why did you remove my stuff off my user talk page i wanted to keep it there to warn people not to be rude on my user talk we all have the right to put things on our user page THANK YOU--User:WikiMembers10 05:13, 29 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiMembers10 (talk • contribs)

September 2010

Hi, I removed your advert tag from this article Taiwan Futures Exchange after I changed a few things, can you take a look to see if everything is alright? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by Yassinemaaroufi (talk • contribs) 13:18, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could explain a little why you marked an article I wrote as an advert? I created this page after doing a project for a class that involved doing a profile on a small technology services company. While I am a little confused what prompted the tagging, I do appreciate you taking the time to review it! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logicworks --T007mav (talk) 02:53, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I was mainly concerned about statements like "Clients are able to reduce capital expenses, operating overhead and multi-vendor management by relying on Logicworks to be an extension of their technical operations" and "The Company’s vendor-certified Professionals have vast experience. . ." which are either unreferenced or are referenced to the company's own promotional material. Such claims need to be backed up by independent unbiased references or they may be considered simply as marketing hype. . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

That makes perfect sense. I will have to rethink how I worded that. I'll have to look over the rest of the document to make sure nothing else is written like that as well. Thanks! T007mav (talk) 04:36, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

July 2010

Hi there. You recently marked my proposed article as "Unacceptable/spam." I would love to have specific feedback as to why you see it as spam instead of a legitimate article. Thank you for any constructive help you can provide. Lnhoward (talk) 12:36, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

The "article" falls entirely under the category of WP:Spam. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:53, 28 July 2010 (UTC)

Hello. You recently marked my company's page, Victor Stanley, Inc. as an advertisement. The text was designed to be unbiased per the guidelines for wikipedia articles. An example of a similarly written competitor page can be found [[1]]. I have marked our existing page as "SANDBOX." Please let me know if the existing text is acceptable, and if not, what must be changed to fit within the guidelines. VictorStanleyWiki (talk) 15:19, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

I appreciate your work on deleting spam but you recently deleted some work I had in progress on a user page which was clearly labeled "Sandbox". It wasn't posted to the official site and I had some verbiage I copied in that I wanted to "wiki-normalize" (if I can say that) about an award the company (service-now) had won. I'm not for boosterism or any of that, you can see I write solid articles when I contribute. I happen to have an interest in cloud computing and ITSM and you can see the same edits I've made to other companies like HP and FrontRange. Anyway, if there is something I'm missing please let me know. When I start an article I don't just like to create a quick stub. I like to develop it a bit in my "sandbox" and then publish it. I should also note that I'm waiting before publishing it because I'm waiting to get permission from the company on use of their logo in the commons since Fair Use doesn't work anymore. --Jasenlee (talk) 19:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Fair enough, I accept from your editing history that your contributions are valid, it's just that in its current state the article reads like any number of other spam adverts. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:35, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Understood, I made some basic edits to clean it up. I have a habit of spending a lot of time doing research and then cutting and pasting into my user page. Then when I feel like it is ready to go I copy it into a real article. --Jasenlee (talk) 19:39, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes... sir! --ΔΔΔ Mr. Nighttime ΔΔΔ (talk) 11:07, 16 July 2010 (UTC)

November 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from North Posey High School When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. I wouldn't necessarily agree that a school's moto is meaningless, yes? A8UDI 16:12, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to the page North Posey High School. Such edits constitute vandalism and are reverted. Please do not continue to make unconstructive edits to pages; use the sandbox for testing. Thank you. 4twenty42o (talk) 16:16, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Please do not remove content from pages without explanation, as you did with this edit to Conard High School. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. 4twenty42o (talk) 16:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mean as custard. You have new messages at A8UDI's talk page.
Message added 16:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

A8UDI 16:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

This is your last warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you vandalize a page, as you did with this edit to Redwood Middle School (Thousand Oaks, California). 4twenty42o (talk) 16:32, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Your comments should go on User talk:4twenty42o, not User:4twenty42o. --NeilN ^{talk ♦ contribs} 16:47, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mean as custard. You have new messages at A8UDI's talk page.
Message added 16:34, 16 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talkback

Hello, Mean as custard. You have new messages at 4twenty42o's talk page.
Message added 16:50, 16 November 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Stop editing the Raychem page. The company is very significant and is a Fortune 500 company. You have been warned. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.252.146.251 (talk) 02:22, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

April 2010

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit was inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. It can help make a vandal stop their disruptive edits. Happy Editing Imperial Monarch (D•R) 22:23, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Canadian Tire Financial Services

I reverted your edits. While I agree Wikipedia isn't a vehcile for advertising, at the same time it's not totally inappropriate for a mention to give context to the article. --Me-123567-Me (talk) 06:30, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Removing spam.

All well and good, but I've been told you should also tag the pages with {{db-spam}}. Otherwise the pages still exist and can, in theory, be reverted. This way they're gone for good. HalfShadow 16:56, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Fair enuff. I just felt that adding {{db-spam}} would mean an additional editor would need to get involved, meaning extra work. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:59, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Well, yeah, but it also means more work for the spammer, so it sort of evens out. A lot of spam here is 'hit and run'; they may never be back. HalfShadow 17:01, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Tagging Adverts

Custard, I noticed you marked my page as an Advert. Can you explain what criteria you used to mark it as such? It abides by all guidelines and regulations. It provides no bias or oppinion, meerly facts. -NjGarfinkel

It's the promotional language that gives the game away, such as "the ability to keep track of all the Sitecore items in your project" and "You can read more about the release here". . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:42, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

They seem to follow the same scheme as what you quoted. Yet these are not tagged as adverts. "gives users the ability to schedule periodic backups of files on their computer, as well as recovery from previous backups. " "offering a new range of organization, navigation, and search capabilities". this is Windows Vista page by the way.

As for the You can read more about the release here... I figured it would be better to link off to all the information than make a new page or fill up the space with techinical details. NjGarfinkel —Preceding undated comment added 15:04, 4 August 2010 (UTC).

It looks less promotional now, but it would need an intro to explain the context of the article, also why the product is notable enough to deserve an encyclopedia article, especially as it is larger than the Sitecore article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:23, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

Why does it need an intro to explain the article? The article is about TDS for SiteCore. That's what it's about and that's what it entails. The intro is the explination of T.D.S. If people want to learn more about SiteCore they can click the link to SiteCore. As for it being longer than SiteCore, I think that is rather irrelevant. Also, to use the Window's Vista analagy again... Microsoft's page is shorter than Windows Vista's page...NjGarfinkel —Preceding undated comment added 15:45, 4 August 2010 (UTC).

Well, I have offered my opinion; suggest you move it to the main Wikipedia space and see what other reviewers think. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:12, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

This is my first post on Wiki. I'm just trying to get it right. When you tell me something that's off-base im going to explain why it's not. some of your suggestions have helped and I have revised them. No need to get defensive. NjGarfinkel (talk) 17:43, 4 August 2010 (UTC)njgarfinkel

Hi Mean as custard. I noticed you've been tagging a lot of spam/advertising pages for speedy deletion. Just want you to know your hard work is appreciated!!

Fastily has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

-FASTILY ^(TALK) 19:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Mmmm, chocolate chips, my favourite! Thank you. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:15, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

I was about to come here to same thing. Some of these pages stretch back a year, even more in some cases, so the fact that you're getting to them is great. Appreciate your hard work! — ξ^xplicit 19:23, 2 June 2010 (UTC)

Hear! Hear! The task of cleaning up spam from user pages can be thankless, but in this case I want to extend a huge "Thank-you" for the work you've put in of late. Cheers, Jezebel'sPonyo^shhh 13:56, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

How in the world do you find all of these userpages? Every time I access CAT:CSD, it seems to be half-filled with spammy userpages and user talkpages; thanks for the good work! Nyttend (talk) 14:55, 3 June 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: User talk:Bluecloud 1

Hello Mean as custard, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of User talk:Bluecloud 1, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: I have removed the promotional portion - personal portion has been kept. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 19:51, 1 June 2010 (UTC)

Deletable pages

Hi there; you are finding vast numbers of spam userpages which you are tagging for deletion. I am not suggesting that you are wrong, because you are not; you are spot-on. But how are you finding them? --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 20:57, 4 June 2010 (UTC)

Mainly been using Template:Spamsearch - feel free to try it. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:06, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Didn't know that one. Thank you. --Anthony.bradbury^"talk" 17:10, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from User talk:Eddynumbers. When removing text, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the text has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. FinalRapture - † ☪ 21:22, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I did. Edit repeated. . . Mean as custard (talk) 21:28, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

That's not your talk page to touch. FinalRapture - † ☪ 21:36, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

I considered tagging it for speedy deletion but felt it was simpler to remove all inappropriate content. . . Mean as custard (talk) 21:41, 5 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your speedy deletion work

Thank you for your recent help with speedy deletions of spam user pages. There are a few that I have declined (check your contributions), primarily because they were personal bios and not spam. These should generally be left alone, or in extreme cases, be nominated for WP:MFD. Stifle (talk) 09:24, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

The Anti-Spam Barnstar

		The Anti-Spam Barnstar
		Good job on finding and tagging old spam articles. Keep up the good work. -- Alexf(talk) 12:31, 6 June 2010 (UTC)

I second that barnstar, keep up the good work! ThemFromSpace 15:20, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

What was that?

What were you doing here? You need to subst welcome templates aswell. FinalRapture - † ☪ 13:28, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Just turning it into a proper talk page. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:31, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

You need to subst welcome templates, please do that in the future. FinalRapture - † ☪ 13:35, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

I don't understand what "subst welcome templates" means. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:37, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

WP:SUBST FinalRapture - † ☪ 14:22, 16 June 2010 (UTC)

Keep up the good excellent work!

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Finding stale userspace spam that went un-noticed when posted is important work, and you are doing an excellent job at detecting it. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:55, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

informing authors

Hi Mean as custard, when you tag pages for deletion please remember to inform the authors - otherwise their pages may just disappear without explanation. Most of the speedy deletion tags produce a warning text that you can copy and paste onto the author's page. Cheer and happy editing. ϢereSpielChequers 12:28, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Not sure if you're interested in using automated tools and scripts, but if you browser is compatible with WP:TWINKLE it will do this for you. Beeblebrox (talk) 15:51, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi Mean as custard, please may I re-iterate the message given by WereSpielChequers. You need to inform the others that you have tagged the pages for deletion, and Beeblebrox's recommendation of WP:TWINKLE is also useful, I suggest that you use this tool if you would like to automate sending the message. If you have any questions, please feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, The Helpful One 19:29, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

If I tag a user talk page for speedy deletion, it seems pointless to then post a message on that page informing the user that it is about to be deleted. I had a look at the documentation for WP:TWINKLE but it made my head hurt. Will post a message manually where appropriate. . .Mean as custard (talk) 21:51, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

The documentation may look complicated, but actually using it is quite simple. I know nothing about programming, Javascript, etc, but I use Twinkle constantly. All you have to do to activate it is go into your preferences, open the "gadgets" tab and click the button. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I agree with Beeblebrox, I too have limited knowledge about programming, but Twinkle creates a nice little CSD tab on the top of the page that automatically will allow you to choose to send the message. With regards to it seeming pointless, I believe that admins look at talk pages from time to time to see if the user has been warned about the deletion - because this is the only way that they will know without having to check the page constantly, and will, therefore be able to contest it. Some users manage to fix/change the articles they have written to ensure that they won't be speedily deleted. Thanks, The Helpful One 23:07, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Hi

You must be the other one that checks userpages.... At times, I think I'm the only one. I like the look of that Template - I just monitor the new accounts using a quick eye for organisational (or doctor's) names, summaries and plain blind intuition. I used to use my own copy and paste for userpage notifications, but now I use {{spam-warn-userpage}}. I prefer to db-spam userpages, and to remove spam directly from talk pages. Everyone to his/her/its own. Keep up the good work. Peridon (talk) 17:29, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

I've been making it up as I go along, but now tend to just remove the offending content unless it is blatant (and recent) spam or the username is clearly promotional, in which case I will usually flag it for speedy deletion. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:01, 19 June 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Wholesalegold

I see you tagged User talk:Wholesalegold with {{db-spam}}. I certainly agree with you that it was spam, but we do not delete user talk pages except under exceptional circumstances, as it is frequently very important to be able to check their record. I have removed the offending material and left a message for the user explaining why. JamesBWatson (talk) 22:20, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

The theory is that if the talk page is deleted and then recreated with a warning message then it makes it more difficult for the spammer to repeat the offence. . . Mean as custard (talk) 22:24, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for welcoming me to Wikipedia! Although it isn't always the most useful paragraph (I, kind of, um, already know wiki-coding) but it really lightens up my bleak UserPage. Thanks

SatanicToothpaste

13:25, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

User pages

I don't think we should put the advertisement notice on articles in the user namespace. /HeyMid (contributions) 22:45, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Although some latitude is given in user space, using Wikipedia for advertising or promotion is not tolerated regardless of which namespace it is in. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:49, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

I sometimes add an advert tag to newly-created user namespace articles which are still being worked on, but if they have been there for some time then they are fair game under speedy deletion criteria. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:40, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits, such as the one you made to User talk:Wikimaker123, did not appear to be constructive and has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. The reverted edit can be found here. Thank you. Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 15:47, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Edit repeated - removal of spam. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:50, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

That was a User Talk Page, any edit may be allowed on the talk page. Please do not blank other User's talk pages. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Joe Gazz84 (talk • contribs) 15:52, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

I have made similar edits to several hundred other user talk pages with no complaints. Perhaps you would like to revert all those as well ? . . Mean as custard (talk)

Edit was found as advertisement, query submitted for block. Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 15:56, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Pardon ??? . . .Mean as custard (talk) 15:57, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Not for you, for the ad/spam you removed. It was my mistake. Thank you for removing it. Joe Gazz84 (user)•(talk)•(contribs) 22:25, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

User talkpages

Just bin the junk. Tag userpages, but you can do it yourself with user talk. I put 'Promotional material removed' and sign it. Sometimes I add another relevant comment. The message is essential to tell people it isn't vandalism. (I've deleted a tag of yours along with the rest and put my message of hope and joy up instead...) Peridon (talk) 21:08, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Huh?

While patrolling newpages in userspace, I have more than once found that you've been there first (which is convenient) and that you've removed spam (which is also convenient).

Since I'm an admin, when I find blatant spam on a userpage, I just delete the page instead of editing it. Sometimes the user in question has earned itself a block, too.

So I checked your contributions in userspace, to see if you'd trimmed the userpages of anyone else who had earned a block. And I noticed that you had done this to Steve44spicer, Shane95smith, and Paul74surtain... and that all three userpages had the exact same spam on them. The pattern is obvious; this is one person using multiple accounts.

So next I went on IRC and asked a checkuser to see if the spammer had any other accounts, either active or 'sleeper'.

To my surprise, he told me that the accounts in question were last used (to spam) over three years ago. In checkuser terms, they've "gone stale", and can't be checked that way.

Which leads to the question of how did you FIND those accounts? I thought you were going through the newpages queue, but newpages only goes back a month! DS (talk) 14:30, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Mainly been searching for spammy-type phrases on user pages and user talk pages. Template:Spamsearch is useful. There is still a lot out there, but I think most of the more blatant adverts have now been sorted. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:00, 8 July 2010 (UTC)

Deletion of user talk pages

I have just seen your speedy deletion nominations of User:Sqllibrarian, User talk:Sqllibrarian, and User talk:Axisnice. I have deleted User:Sqllibrarian, but we do not delete user talk pages except under very exceptional circumstances. I have removed the spam and tagged them with {{Subst:uw-advert1}}, which you can do yourself in future, if you like. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:07, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I see that at 15:33, 12 July 2010 you tagged User talk:Kshithija for speedy deletion. User talk pages are not deleted except under very exceptional circumstances, such as serious libel. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:46, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

I would have tagged it with {{Subst:uw-advert1}}, but felt it needed to be brought to the attention of an administrator because of its promotional user name. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:49, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I see what you mean. you could report such cases to Wikipedia:Usernames for administrator attention, though. For more borderline or doubtful cases there's also Wikipedia:Requests for comment/User names. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:43, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Anti-Spam Barnstar
		For your excellent G11 taggings of userpages. It's nice to come across someone who despises spam as much as I do! Keep it up. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 11:19, 22 July 2010 (UTC)

Hyde.park hotels

Not a spam for the hotel, which is a reputable business. This was a 419 scam trying to trick overseas workers into forking out advance fees - or similar. Be wary of email addresses like Hyde.park_hotels@london.com. Most businesses this size will have their own domain - and this one does. London.com is notorious, and I've changed the call for deletion and blanked it. (I don't usually call for talk pages to be deleted, except in attack cases, but I want this info off.) Peridon (talk) 14:08, 27 July 2010 (UTC)

Eclerx ineligible for PROD

Just to let you know that I've deprodded Eclerx. I don't disagree with your reasoning; however, as the article has been through AfD before (in 2007), it's ineligible for proposed deletion. A second AfD would be the correct course for this article. —C.Fred (talk) 18:35, 7 August 2010 (UTC)

promotional material in userspace

Hi! I was yesterday in discussion with someone of the anti-spam team, and I decided to write an editfilter (Special:AbuseFilter/354) logging promotional material edited by users in their own userspace (based on {{spamsearch}}). This morning I noticed that you already beat me to it in some cases. I have a question (well, 2 ..). Could you please tag pages which are only promotional with {{db-spam}} (as long as there are no other constructive edits to the page), and if you encounter things which are not in the log, could you point me to them. We might be able to tighten the system a bit. After that I am considering to tag the edits (though it looks like it is doing a good job, ignore the first 20 hits, at that time there was a mistake). Thanks! --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:30, 20 August 2010 (UTC)

I have enabled tagging now. So hunting these will become easier. I note that you are still removing the spam and replacing it with something else, really, it is better to delete it altogether, so may I ask you again to just add {{db-spam}} at the top? --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 09:07, 25 August 2010 (UTC)

A Note

I am a new user and I have just added something on my talk page, but your message overwrote the original things on my talk page. Would you mind helping me restore the things that I have just posted? Thank you very much. -- LS C HIST (talk) 12:50, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

I removed it as standard Wikipedia rules apply to all talk pages; you cannot make up your own rules. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:04, 21 August 2010 (UTC)

Would you mind discussing with me regarding this issue? Thanks. -- LS C HIST (talk) 12:04, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

User talk pages are intended to encourage discussion of improvements to Wikipedia articles. Contributors are likely to be strongly discouraged if they feel they must conform to an arbitrary set of rules such as "please capitalise the first letter of each word in your title of your message". Userboxes, categories and random philosophising belong in your user page, not in your talk page . . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:20, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

User:LS C HIST

As the only other editor to have interacted with this one, I wanted to drop you a note letting you know about ongoing concerns I have. I've just left a note on their talk page[2] and thought you might want to chime in as well. 69.181.249.92 (talk) 05:10, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

removal of headers

It is still the users' talkspace. I can see what you mean, but continuous removal without trying to discuss it with the editor is not getting anywhere. Could you please just discuss your concerns with the editor? Thanks. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 10:08, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

He is removing web pages I have updated as well. I'm considering reporting his behavior and will consider asking for a ruling if he does it again. I can understand a newbie's wanting to make a name for himself but WikiPedia has procedures, policies, and rules, and discussion is the way to go about things. Edit: I will assum that he is removing my edits based on "good faith" however now that he has been warned, he will bwe reported for one further violation. NotSoOldHippy (talk) 01:15, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

OK, I gave you a friendly request not to do it again, and to discuss it with the editor. You get close to edit warring and harassment:

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits.
The next time you remove or blank page content or templates from Wikipedia, as you did to User talk:LS C HIST , you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 18:17, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

What happened to my level 2 and level 3 warnings? I realise where you are coming from now, looking at the overblown verbosity of your own talk page headers. Please judge my good faith based on all my edits, not just on a couple of disputed cases. . Mean as custard (talk) 20:28, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Well, you are here long enough to know what good faith means, and what users can do with 'their' talkpage area. I said earlier, that that header on LS C HIST's talkpage is maybe a bit excessive, but calling it control freakery without any further form of discussion with the editor and continuous removal is not the way forward. You are not assuming good faith on the editor, and you are close to biting them. Try to talk to them about it. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 07:56, 29 August 2010 (UTC)

Stop or you will be reported

I will assume that your removing my edits is "good faith" however this is a warning that if you continue toi remove my edits, you will be reported according to the rules. If you have questions about how to use WikiPedia and what the rules are, ask me. Thanks. NotSoOldHippy (talk) 01:14, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Can you explain why you are adding external links to someone else's user page ? . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:23, 28 August 2010 (UTC)

Magodaric and Mavuso News

Hi, referring to this, you might be interested in the tag removal and the article move. See also this. I have no idea how to handle this. DVdm (talk) 16:46, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

See also this request at ANI. DVdm (talk) 07:15, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Morenooso/Fish Smarty

Please stay out of my userspace. ----moreno oso (talk) 02:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

I don't know what the article is doing there, but it reads like blatant spam. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:29, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

You can think what you want but it's in a userspace area and not for public consumption as per the admin who declined your CSD. ----moreno oso (talk) 03:59, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI

Sorry about this -- Special:RecentChanges is packed with "rollback" links, and once in a while I accidentally tap one while dragging the pointer across the screen ... anyway, fixed. Antandrus (talk) 01:50, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Re recent tag as advert

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudha_Pennathur Can you explain your objection? All those phrases are directly from the books and magazines. I tried to remove any that appeared marketing driven... Really tried to bowl down the middle.... stayed to factual matters... she is known for not using factories... but for using local craftsman (that is a distinction in Indian Manufacturing) The reducing redtape effort was written about in Indian Journals because it significantly helped tyhe ministries to reduce overall redtape for exporting companies... appreciate your feedback...

CharlesMs (talk) 15:46, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

The article simply makes grandiose claims of notability and good works without giving any references to back up these claims, although numerous external links are listed (not encouraged in Wikipedia). Overall it reads like a promotional piece. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:10, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Your point taken on Links... I just had someone give me input on inline references so I can chop away at those external links... which I realized was out of standards.... I have a level 2 looking at it.... can you tell me what you are referring to as grandiose? BTW... about to do several of these on Disney Creative types so I am really trying to get this one (which is difficult because most notoriety is from business which I agree would be promotional) As a primmer I looked at several significant designers pages which I feel are a bit top heavy on promotion and "the grandiose" I would like to get this page boiled down correctly because I have a friend in India who is unconnected and wants to write the Indian version... any help you can give is appreciated! Many Thanks (Oh and thanks again for pointing out the numerous links problem)... will post again when modified... CharlesMs (talk) 20:24, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

It's mainly claims like "known for bringing Indian inspired designs to the American Market" and "Pennathur has sought to keep the art of Indian Craftsmanship alive", which may well be true, but need specific references to unbiased sources which back up these claims, otherwise they may be considered simply as marketing hype. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:30, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Perfect I understand what you mean.... I will repost when modified.... Appreciate the help.... CharlesMs (talk) 21:56, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Please Review again... have moved links to references... if unable to untag as advertisement please advice why... see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sudha_Pennathur Many Thanks...

CharlesMs (talk) 00:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

A few friendly suggestions

Hello, Mac. I've seen your efforts to remove spam from many of Wikipedia's pages, and I greatly appreciate it. I think it would be better if you speedy deleted a page under G11 as advertising and/or reported the user to WP:UAA if their username is a promotional one and a blatant violation of the username policy. Thanks for all your help removing spam. :| TelCoNaSpVe :| 23:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Userpage messages

Hi there. I saw someone posted a message on your userpage. I then reverted it, but then I saw that your userpage, which was not even made by you, is full of such messages. I am not sure if you are aware of the situation on your userpage, however, not one edit one your userpage was made by you. I am confused. --The High Fin Sperm Whale 17:00, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Good point: entries copied below and user page blanked. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:09, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi, this is my first time on wiki. could you please review back my page because it is still marked "like an advertisement". Thank you.

Thank you, Klmarathon

---

Hi - I am confused by why you marked my submission as buzzwords and reads like an advertisement. I am in the process of writing this objectively, and thought I was working in a sandbox. Can you clarify why this was marked as such?

Thanks.

danmiller236

---

Hi,

I'm not sure if the new page I have written is better, can you check please and let me know where it is going wrong? You did not write anything.

---

Mean as custard, you recently marked my page as an advert. It abides by all guidelines and is strictly factual and provides no bias or oppinions. Could you please exaplain what criteria you used to determine my page an advert. Thank you.

-NjGarfinkel

Hi Mean as custard, my page has been marked as an advert however I am writing about the fashion industry and participants in greater london and this article happens to be the first one of the series. My study about the fashion industry fits in to the encyclopedia doesn't it? Let me know

-mimifashion

Hi, please could you explain why you have edited the copy on the Mediaedge:CIA page? You cite your reason as 'reverting to less promotional version' but it is out of date, which is the reason behind making the edits. My version of the edits included updated information about Mediaedge:CIA, including the fact that they are no longer call Mediaedge:CIA but MEC. The copy was in no way promotional but merely factually correct.

-thisisissi

Hi, Can you please let me know what i can do to make it not an advert, this is a guide to radio control flying and i have mentioned differnt products for people to look up as an example of differnt types of planes. Please let me know what to do with it.

-Mikestoreyrc

I STRONGLY EXHORT YOU TO USE MY USER TALK PAGE

Before creating any kind of suspicious disruption into my PERSONAL USER PAGE or any type of obnoxious dispute within my USER TALK PAGE. In any case, Treat my Space, Contributions and Personal Belongings with RESPECT. This is the End of our Conversation. Please refrain yourself from replying this communication in my USER PAGE. (Spacestoned (talk) 11:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC))

God, not another control freak. . . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:45, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

User:Fraddk/Miaaw

Thank you for experimenting with the page User:Fraddk/Miaaw on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. You removed the "noindex" tag, allowing it to be used as advertising, along with everything else in a sandbox. Besides being wildly counterproductive to what you probably wanted to do, it was extremely rude to bite a newbie. Let it sit for a few months, where nobody else can see it, until the newbie can work on it. Take a 'lude, dude. Bearian (talk) 14:08, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Question concerning Telecom Corridor Genealogy Project article

Hi,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Telecom_Corridor_Genealogy_Project

I'm working hard on the article above. I know that this is not the right place to post this question, but it is my first time working with wiki. In the past few days I responded to the notablity comment that you added in the article with adding many secondary references.

What am I doing wrong - why isn't the notice going away.

Hope you can help me. I'm currently not logged in, but my user is Ninabach2111.

Best,

Nina —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.51.68.74 (talk) 22:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

The article admittedly now has plenty of references, but most of them pre-date the concept of the project, and so are unable to assert the notability of the article subject. More recent references would (in my opinion) be needed which directly refer to the project. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:04, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Vandalism

Cease vandalizing my user page or you may be blocked from editing. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Wentclothes (talk • contribs) 03:13, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Offensive material says: "words and images that can be considered offensive should not be included unless they are treated in an encyclopedic manner". . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

2010 Toronto municipal operating budget Why

Toronto is the largest city in Canada, with a budget more than the GDP of several povinces. Please explain why 2003–04 NHL season meets the notability criteria, and critical information about the budget does not. There are wikipedia articles about baseball player cards, and xmen characters, and we have to explain why an article about one of the worlds largest cities should exist. Have you read the article before placing the tag? --Natkeeran (talk) 20:15, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I was not saying that the subject is definitely unnotable, only that the article at present relies solely on primary sources, and independent unbiased references should also be cited to demonstrate its notability. As for articles about baseball player cards and xmen characters, feel free to tag them as unnotable. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

I've added some seconary sources. However, primary source is key here, because it is a goverment budget, and the goverment provides the stats, just as NHL provides stats about its season or games. --Natkeeran (talk) 20:26, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

The article still doesn't show why the subject is notable; as it stands it is just a list of figures, with no commentary or explanation, e.g. how the budget was arrived at, historical background, public reaction. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:34, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

This is a wiki. Article is supposed to develop through collaboration. You indicated that the topic is not unnotable. This is very valuable information for at least the 5 million people living in Toronto. --Natkeeran (talk) 15:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

I am moving this discussion to the articles talk page.

On blanking of spam userpages

Nice job on locating those personal résumés and blanking them, but corporate spam needs to purged. Tag them with {{db-spam}} to mark them for deletion. I have to go over your edits and undo some of them just to apply the tag. Alexius08 (talk) 10:21, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Purging the user page seems unnecessary when they just consist of a spam link and the user name is not promotional; sufficient just to blank the page. . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:05, 24 October 2010 (UTC)

Patrol

I would find it very useful if you would incorporate your userspace work into the Wikipedia:New pages patrol/patrolled pages (which applies to all namespaces, really). Thanks. DS (talk) 13:18, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

How ? . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:14, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

If you go through the list of newly-created pages, as accessed from Special:Newpages, then any pages that have not yet been 'patrolled' will be highlighted in yellow. You can also set the option to only show the unpatrolled pages. When you select a page like that, it will have - at the bottom - a link saying "mark here as patrolled". If the page is fine, click the link. If not, don't. [Incidentally, pages that talk about how the user is 13 or younger = not fine = leave them, I'll deal with it]. I do a lot of this, and it's easier once the perfectly-acceptable pages are out of the way. DS (talk) 14:35, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

I generally monitor New editors' contributions, which doesn't give this option. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:36, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Ah well. On a somewhat related point, if you happen to find a great many userpages which are substantively identical, please relay the information to me as they will probably need to be blocked. DS (talk) 17:28, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Talk page warnings

I see that you quite rightly tagged User:Living Local Magazine/Living Local Magazine for speedy deletion as spam. However, you posted the user warning message to User talk:Living Local Magazine/Living Local Magazine, rather than to User talk:Living Local Magazine, where it belonged. I have copied the message from the user talk subpage to the main user talk page, but I thought it might be useful to mention it as something to watch out for in the future. While I am here I should also like to thank you for your work: I often come across your contributions to cleaning up unacceptable content of one sort or another, and regard you as a great asset to Wikipedia. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:44, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Just to let you know - I wholly concur with JamesBWatson. You're doing some very useful stuff (but sometimes you're committing minor procedural errors), and are an asset to the project. DS (talk) 13:17, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Blanking of User:Foreclosurepedia

Hi! I see that you blanked User:Foreclosurepedia with the summary "Spam link removal"[3]. The user posted a complaint about that here earlier, but subsequently deleted it because User:BarkingFish gave them a civility warning about it. Could I ask you to revisit this issue and explain your thinking here? I fear that this new user is feeling rather bitten. Thanks, Bovlb (talk) 08:09, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

The page has since been deleted so I don't know what exactly was on it, but what I tend to object to is new users creating a page containing nothing about themselves as Wikipedians, just a link to their own commercial site. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:38, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

User talk:Rsload2010

I reverted this page to an earlier version without the advertising content. Please note that speedily deleting the page would have meant deleting everything on the page -- including the notice that the user had been blocked indefinitely. I didn't think it was your intention to get rid of the block notice, too. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 22:26, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

My main intention was to get the user blocked from editing his talk page. . . Mean as custard (talk) 23:15, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

In that case, I would recommend taking the issue to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents where they can advise whether the user should be blocked from editing his talk page. --Metropolitan90 (talk) 01:21, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

User:StatisticsONS

I have removed the db-spam template. This is the newly created userspace of an official British government office. They have the right to make themselves known. This cannot be considered spam. I hope you'll agree. JoJan (talk) 17:02, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

It is still inappropriate use of a user account. Template reinstated. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:06, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a medium for "making yourself known", otherwise known as advertising yourself. It most certainly can be considered spam, and I have deleted it. In addition, no organisation, including "an official British government office", has any right to an account here. Wikipedia policy is that accounts must not represent organisations. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:53, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Spam userpages

You're ding great work, but when you encounter a spammy userpage, would you consider tagging it as {{db-g11}} instead of blanking it? The spam should be deleted from history, not merely blanked, if that's all the history has ever contained. Courcelles 03:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Top Racehorses In History

Hello. Thank you for tagging this article for deletion. As I checked on the editor who created it they have a very problematic editing history including creating other articles that have been deleted. This looks to be a vanity list of their favorite horses. If it does not get deleted after seven days I will be happy to help move it to AFD so that we can get it off of wikipedia. Thanks again and cheers. MarnetteD | Talk 16:48, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

This article has been deleted by an admin so we can return to normal editing - if possible. MarnetteD | Talk 19:38, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	I keep on finding spam and other unsuitable pages that you have flagged for deletion. You are clearly putting a lot of good work into this. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:49, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Whistle blower

Hi, I have a Roland Gibeaux emailing WP:OTRS wanting to make an edit to a page he says you own; I have told him that nobody owns it but I think he could do with a bit of help understanding how to source and edit. I've suggested he talk to you here. I hope I can rely on you not to WP:BITE, he seems like a decent fellow. Thanks, Guy (Help!) 20:35, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Notification desired

Please don't forget to notify the creator of an article when you nominate for CSD, e.g. DHK channel--SPhilbrickT 18:06, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

A new rationale

One of the rationales I use when going through userspace, and which you may find convenient, is "WP:NOT a resume bank". DS (talk) 14:50, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion

When tagging a page for speedy deletion as spam, please use {{db-spam}} so Administrators can find it easier. Thanks, Nakon 09:21, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

I never use anything else. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:22, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

It would be on User:Humphreyjen, you just blanked the page rather than tagging for G11. Nakon 09:28, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

C9H13O3N

I have removed the tag that I placed on C9H13O3N earlyer, I'll nominate if for deletion instead as it appears to have a hint of notability, thankyou. I will also warn the auther for removing the tag as well. H66666666 (talk) 14:37, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I can't find anything at all notable about it. Tag replaced. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:40, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I've now nominated it for deletion, see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/C9H13O3N‎. H66666666 (talk) 14:45, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Note one page does link to it. H66666666 (talk) 14:47, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Although Zebra-online.com is definatelly spam. H66666666 (talk) 14:52, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Please explain your deletion of a valid entry from disdambiguation page

http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=L%C3%B6we&diff=next&oldid=404572789 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Loew Galitz (talk • contribs) 17:05, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

The entry had so many wikilinks and external links that it was difficult to see that it was pointing to an actual article. I have removed the superfluous links to make it clearer. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:36, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

I looked into your edit history and really appreciate a huge amount of garbage you are removing from wikipedia every day. However I would urge you to be more careful with your deletions. I understand your explanation above and agree with the intentions, however this was not what you did. You deleted a valid disambig entry completely, rather than removed the superfluous external link.

I don't mean to be an obnoxiuos critic of your important activity, but it seems that the sheer amount of work forces you to be in a kind of impatient state (at least I know this feeling), and you are just slicing away big chunks rather than separating chaff from good stuff, as in here. I agree that the style was more like in an advert, but what would you want from a PR guy? However you did delete pieces of factual, neutral info (e.g., names of subsidiaries and locations). At the same time, you left intact a rant about "tens of thousands of customers" (I removed it). I would suggest you to consider a well-known negative effect of "desensitization" (e.g. for physicians and police officers) when you work hard and long cutting flesh. I don't really care what happens with this page, and if the deleted factual info will be lost forever, I will not cry into my pillow, but please try and be less drastic. I will not bother you any more. Sorry for a long rant of an old man. Loew Galitz (talk) 16:53, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

In the example you quote, none of the content I removed was valid Wikipedia material because: (a) it was purely promotional in tone, and (b) it did not cite any references or sources. However, I take your point that in some cases merely removing offending material can lessen the value of an article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:02, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. By the way, a Melissa tried to talk to you on your user page last month. I guess it is not on your watchlist :-) Loew Galitz (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

speedy deletion of OCTAVE Business School

hello custord, trying to find out why the page was deleted! I am citing few references below. pl. do explain...

the page is similar to articles already found on wikipedia and in the same geographic region pune Europe Asia Business School Symbiosis Institute of Computer Studies and Research (SICSR) Symbiosis Institute of Management Studies (SIMS) Symbiosis Institute of Telecom Management (SITM) Symbiosis Institute of International Business (SIIB) Symbiosis Institute of Business Management (SIBM) Balaji Institute of Modern Management Pune (BIMM) (formerly known as Indian Institute of Modern Management (IIMM))

Sites reviewed and edited.Mean as custard (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

OCTAVE Business School is a community driven initiative by BITS Pilani alumni (BITS Pilani is the top private engineering institute in India since the past 50 years) in India for creating world class chain of management schools in India. the website www.octavesbm.in has been up for more than a year and a wikipedia page was created 3 days back but it was deleted.

This reads like spam. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

OCTAVE is supported by BITS Pilani alumni in silicon valley.
Youtube video of a patron

Youtube is not a valid source of unbiased information.Mean as custard (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

for spreading awareness of quality management education in India, we need support of wikipedia. Our students post independently at the blog Students blog

Blogs are not a valid source of unbiased information. The purpose of Wikipedia is not to spread awareness of unnotable organisations. Mean as custard (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

OCTAVE idea is led by a team of inspired and educated professionals from nagpur area in india Bitsaa leaders

"inspired and educated" are peacock terms and are strongly discouraged.Mean as custard (talk) 09:38, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

--OCTAVE Business School 07:39, 30 December 2010 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Octavesbm (talk • contribs)

Your username suggests you are closely connected with octave; Wikipedia guidelines are that you are not encouraged to write articles about organisations with which you have a close association. Most of the other business school articles you list have some claim to fame, for example they are highly ranked, and quote independent references to verify the fact. If the Octave article were recreated it would need to show why is important and have independent citations to prove it. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:32, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

"But the dragon was a coward, and she called him Custard"

But you, Sir, are as sharp as Mustard. Or something along those lines. --Shirt58 (talk) 14:07, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Templates_for_discussion/Log/2011_January_10#Template:Spam-warn-userpage

Thought I'd let you know about this. Could you pass word to the other userpage monitors you might remember? You are the one that comes immediately to mind, but there are others I can't recall offhand. Peridon (talk) 23:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the pointer; no other names come to mind at the moment. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:26, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Blanking of page

Please use the Speedy deletion template instead of just going in and deleting peoples work. Example of a page you blanked: User:Oceanomaly Other people have asked you to use the the speedy deletion template as well. Thanks, --Darkskynet (talk) 09:00, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

The page was clearly promoting a group, hence I removed it, replacing it with an explanation as to why this was done. The only reason for using the speedy delete template would be when the page history needs to be removed and an administrator given the opportunity to block or warn the user. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:05, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Ok, i was mistaken. Sorry. Thanks for making wikipedia great! --Darkskynet (talk) 09:18, 15 January 2011 (UTC)

Re:

Is there a reason we can't wait for the user to reply to my message? Tiderolls 08:15, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Well, it is up to an administrator, but as far as I am concerned this one of the most blatant examples of promotional use of a user account I have seen, and the user should also be blocked as having a promotional user name. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:19, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

I believe you are correct in your assessment, which was what motivated my contacting the user. However, that doesn't answer my question. Would you consider removing the CSD tag until I can determine if the user is going to respond? Tiderolls 08:23, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, no. I don't think that would serve any purpose. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:27, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've declined the speedy deletion so that I may attempt to get the user to respond. I'll probably end up deleting the page shortly anyway, but I wanted to give them an opportunity to have their say. Regards Tiderolls 08:44, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

For what it's worth I think it is a mistake in situations like this to invite the user to change their name. It frequently results in the user changing their user name, continuing to make promotional edits, and eventually being blocked anyway. It is unfair to the user to encourage them to waste their time making changes which they think will enable them to carry on editing but in fact does nothing of the sort, as well as wasting the time of other Wikipedians in dealing with the issue. Whee both a user name and the users edits show clearly that their only purpose in editing is to spam, the spam should be deleted and the user blocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Jerseysela

I see that you have valiantly been struggling against abuse of the page User talk:Jerseysela. Thank you for your efforts. I have deleted the unacceptable material and given the user two messages explaining the situation. One of the messages gives low-key mention of the possibility of a block. In view of the number of times you have told the user their editing was unacceptable, I think any more could justify a jump to a level 3 warning (or even level 4) and I will be willing to block after that if it continues. Please feel welcome to post to my talk page if you wish to mention any further activity. (Incidentally, if I had been in your place, rather than just repeat the same level 1 warning five times, I would have moved up to a higher level.) JamesBWatson (talk) 12:05, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Removal of ad note

Hi there, I've been helping with Dads for Life movement Singapore. thanks for your input earlier - it's been edited for neutral pov and beefed up citations. Will be removing ad label unless otherwise advised - let me know. Cheers! Keiomae (talk) 08:45, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletions and patrolling

Hey, just a heads up — it's considered "best practices" to mark as patrolled pages you tag for speedy deletion so editors on new page patrol don't stumble across articles that've already been taken care of. Cheers, Feezo (Talk) 12:24, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Smartse has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can Spread the "WikiLove" by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

In the short time I've been an admin (less than a day) I've already deleted a lot of articles well tagged by you. Have this cookie for your hard work and keep it up. SmartSE (talk) 12:40, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Altered speedy deletion rationale: Cute maidens of energy

Hello Mean as custard. I am just letting you know that I deleted Cute maidens of energy, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided, which doesn't fit the page in question. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 19:05, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Lokvirsa

If you don't mind, I have changed your notice on Lokvirsa's talkpage regarding his/her userpage with {{subst:Spam-warn-userpage}}, as it provides more information about user pages with advertising content. Thanks for patrolling! Logan _Talk ^{Contributions} 18:27, 13 February 2011 (UTC)

Just an FYI

G11 applies everywhere (that's why it's general), not just to articles; if you come across user pages like this, you can tag them for deletion as spam. I tend to do this because there's frequently overlap with G11 and G12, and the bots don't check userpages. I apologize if you knew this already. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 19:08, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your warm welcome "Mean as custard" but why would I want to continue contributing to Wikipedia when the referenced and rather innocous comment I made about Jerry Seinfeld doing Transcendental Meditation was deleted without a word of explanation. Snapdog77 (talk) 02:12, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

CSD

The draft User:Uds1987/Sabre Software Innovations has problems, but it is in userspace and nonindexed, exactly where we want editors to work on drafts. It may never be acceptable, but I prefer to avoid speedies in userspace, except for Copyvio and attacks.--SPhilbrickT 20:13, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

CloudSafe Tag

Hello, CloudSafe was tagged by you because of WP:N, could you please have a look at Wikipedia:Deletion_review#CloudSafe and remove the tag? Best, Roberto valerio (talk) 18:36, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

I read the deletion review before placing the tags. As the article stands it doesn't quote any references to demonstrate notability, it just has an unexplained list of external links. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Recent prop delete of ISIRIs

Hi Mean as custard,

I have just noticed your delete notices on User talk:In fact for non-notability. I added a comment on that talk page at the same time, that you might find of interest. It regards various articles from the user that would have a similar problem, I suspect, from your point of view, especially regarding the cite problem I mention. Acabashi (talk) 11:15, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Update: User talk:In fact has blanked my (very reasonable I think) comment - you will have to go back a couple of versions on the user page. Thanks. Acabashi (talk) 11:20, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

ISIRI

Hi, before you go any further, please read this. Regards, *** in fact *** ( contact ) 11:17, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

CSD notification

Please don't forget to notify the creator of an article when you nominate for CSD, e.g. Somali selection Team--SPhilbrickT 13:29, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

When the user has created a large number of pointless articles, it seems unnecessary to warn him individually about every one of them. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:27, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Elgin Youth Symphony Orchestra (EYSO) article

Hi Mean as custard, Thanks for your edits. This is my first wikipedia article so I appreciate your input. I have started replacing the handful of peacock references and the [citations needed] tags as needed. When they are all done, do you go back and review the article again? Just wanting to know. Thanks again for any advice. CohenJoelB (talk) 21:28, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

---

Hi again, I have added citations that support the philosophy and mission statements of the EYSO. Also removed a line that had no external citation support. I hope we have addressed all your outstanding issues at this point. If not, please let us know where we are lacking substantiation. Thanks again CohenJoelB (talk) 09:56, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Admin rights

I have lost count of the number of times I have followed up one of your deletion nominations of spam user pages. I should be happy to nominate you for adminship so that you can do the job yourself. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 12:12, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Architecture studio

My article is not different than many other pages from other big architecture studios, and is specially important because of the conception about architecture as a not polarized position: Skyscrapers vs. Social Housing.

Its refers exactly about the opposite, Skyscrapers and Social Housing, this depending where, for whom, and in which context the project is located. Rural ? Urban? Refugees?, or for wealthy clients?

This small manifest pretends to harmonize between social differences, trying to find solutions for both parties, and invites to make their different perspectives more tolerant between each other.

I already changed the information on my article which i considered not encyclopedic, and would really appreciate if you could check my modified article to make sure it's now allowed to be published on wikipedia.

Thanks ahead!

Hans Leidescher

(moved from your userpage. --Dirk Beetstra ^{T C} 13:00, 25 February 2011 (UTC))

Telmar (software)

Hi there. You tagged that as "advert" [4] and I'm not convinced that tag is appropriate; the author is questioning it (with a {{helpme}}) - please could you comment in the thread on their talk, User talk:Brom479#Help request Telmar part 2 - advert. Cheers,  Chzz  ►  15:48, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks.  Chzz  ►  03:31, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Maxoff

Hello Mean as custard, I was just asking what you think of that user page, see Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Maxoff. Japanese knotweed (talk) 13:04, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

Unless it's an extremely subtle promotion for a supermarket chain, or a well-known footwear brand, I don't see any problem with it. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:09, 26 February 2011 (UTC)

User:Legal2011

I saw you removed advertising from this user's page. This was properly done and within policy. Would I trouble you to please warn the user in the future? You did not leave any standard warning. Template:Uw-advert1 is a good choice. I left them a notice, so they understand what they did wrong. Thanks. -- Alexf^(talk) 16:23, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

		The Anti-Spam Barnstar
		Mean as custard, you do a lot to keep Wikipedia free of spam and advert. You deserve this star. Thanks for your dedicated and relentless work. Vejvančický (talk | contribs) 15:45, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Well-behaved document

Could you please look at User talk:JohnMie#Proposed deletion of Well-behaved document, and perhaps clarify what you meant by "essay". I sort-of know what you meant, but without a link or anything, it is hard to tell. Maybe you could give the user some specific examples of inappropriate wording. Thanks,  Chzz  ►  21:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

User:ALJonesPorzio/Sandbox

Just a quick note on the CSD for User:ALJonesPorzio/Sandbox. I can see why you marked it as spam, but I can equally imagine this was a gf attempt by someone who doesn't know that an article about his own firm doesn't stand a snowball's chance around here. I'm going to WP:BOLDly blank it and leave the user a note linking to WP:SPAM and WP:COI. If it pops back up in a spammy form, feel free to drop me an email and have me delete it on sight.--Fabrictramp | talk to me 22:49, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

User talk:Kenponhokke

I've taken the tag off because it's a user talkpage. I'm not at all sure what the heck it's about, but if you think it's spam, just take it out. BTW a friend of mine (a user but not editor) says she wants to get a t-shirt printed with your username on it. She didn't get it for a couple of minutes when I mentioned it to her. Peridon (talk) 14:00, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've left it; it wasn't very promotional, though it bears no resemblance to a user talk page. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:45, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Self-promotion?

You deleted what I wrote on my user page, giving the reason it was self-promotion. I don't consider it self-promotion, but rather honesty - to give a description of who I am, and links to my work. Do we really have to hide behind pen names and not openly tell a little about ourselves to be on Wikipedia? What you call self-promotion, I call openness. Only cowards does not tell who they are. So, now my question is: how can I let other Wikipedia users know who I am? HansensMagNET (talk) 19:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

As with Wikipedia articles, user pages should be self-contained and provide all the reader requires to know about the subject, without overly promoting the topic. External links exist to verify what is written, and as a a source of further information. It is not acceptable for a Wikipedia article or a user page to just say in effect "Here I am, now go to my website". . . Mean as custard (talk) 21:12, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Thank you. You wrote "provide all the reader requires to know about the subject" and "External links exist to verify what is written" - which was exactly what I did. I wrote my name, what I do, and made a link to my blog - where this could be verified. I didn't try to promote myself, but found it normal courtesy to let people know who I am. HansensMagNET (talk) 16:27, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Energit

I redirected it instead of deletion, and can protect it if you want to. Bearian (talk) 20:28, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Your edit to user page SSZ

Do not censure user pages as you did here. This weblink is perfectly acceptable as per WP policy. It contains no advertisment or self-promotion. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.1.186 (talk) 18:13, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

last warning: please do not vandalize user page SSZ as you did here or you might be blocked form editing Wikipedia. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.1.186 (talk) 18:39, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

It is difficult to work out what the link is about, but it reads like a rambling, self-promotional rant. In any case it has no connection to Wikipedia. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:43, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

please do not use untrue, insulting and defamatory words. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.1.186 (talk) 18:44, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I promise to remember and follow these words of wisdom. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:47, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

I would also ask that you mind your own business from now on. Please do not edit my user page or talk to me again. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.3.1.186 (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

As your posts are identified only by an IP address it is difficult to know who you are in order not to talk to you, if you see what I mean. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:58, 8 April 2011 (UTC)

Use of Trivia - Virginia Workers' Compensation Commission

Mean as Custard: I respectfully ask that you not delete information on the VWC page. Everything I am putting on the page is relevant to the organization and I don't understand why you regard it as trivia based on the Wiki definition I have read. I do welcome any suggestions you have for the page. I am trying to model it after the SCC page for Virginia. I am working on a project for Public Administration for the Masters of Public Administration (MPA) program that I am in. I will be doing some reasearch in the coming weeks to try to find more references to put on the page. I can see you do wonderful work in the Wikipedia world, so I am disappointed that you think my contributions are somewhat useless.  :-) Please give me some suggestions on how to improve the page. I am going to take some pictures soon to put on the page. Thanks for the feedback. AmyVT2013 (talk) 13:00, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I've been a little less liberal with the pruning shears this time, but there is still a lot of superfluous content. I accept that everything you are putting on the page is relevant to the organization, however that does not mean that it all belongs in an encyclopedia article about the organization. It is fine to have the history of the commission, what it does, and where its offices are, but sections like vision, mission and values, and detailed discussion of technical procedures and legislation seem a little over the top, unless you can cite independent sources to show they are notable. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:42, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Would you mind if I add the code sections back in? The links to these are really what govern the Worker's Compensation Commission. They are supported by Virginia law. Thanks for your feedback. AmyVT2013 (talk) 19:23, 14 April 2011 (UTC) Could you take a look at the State Corporation Commission (Virginia) article and tell me why what is on that page is okay and why what is on the VWC page is not? Thanks again for your help. AmyVT2013 (talk) 19:36, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

The State Corporation Commission article has its faults, but it provides numerous sources as references, and its mission statement, though uncited, tells you something about the organisation, whereas the Compensation Commission mission statements read like meaningless promotional drivel. My personal view is that the code sections only belong in the article if citations can be given to neutral third-party sources to show that they are notable. I won't edit the article any further, but other users may have their own views. . . Mean as custard (talk) 21:45, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

Urban Decay (Cosmetics)

Hi,

I'm new to Wikipedia and was just wondering why my edit to the Urban Decay page was reverted?

Thanks, Rstar17 (talk) 22:29, 10 October 2011 (UTC)Rstar17