User talk:Patriotick

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising in articles. For more information on this, see

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! Cornell Rockey 14:31, 8 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

carousel & lighthouse

I felt your additions were both violations of item 13 of this wikipedia policy: WP: Exernal Links: links to normally be avoided. In short, they were esoteric & specific examples in an article about a very broad subject. Cornell Rockey 03:44, 9 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Duplicate images uploaded

Thanks for uploading Image:PointLookoutLighthouse2.jpg. A machine-controlled robot account noticed that you also uploaded the same image under the name Image:OokoutLighthouse2.jpg. The copy called Image:OokoutLighthouse2.jpg has been marked for speedy deletion since it is redundant. If this sounds okay to you, there is no need for you to take any action.

This is an automated message- you have not upset or annoyed anyone. In the future, you may save yourself some confusion if you supply a meaningful file name and remember exactly which name you chose (file names are case sensitive, including the extension) so that you won't lose track of your uploads. For tips on good file naming, see Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions about this notice, or feel that the deletion is inappropriate, please contact User:Staecker, who operates the robot account. Staeckerbot 06:17, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Point Lookout Lighthouse

Nice work on the article. I've added some categories, wikified it a little more, linked the Point Lookout State Park and St. Mary's County articles to it, and moved it from Point lookout lighthouse to Point Lookout Lighthouse so the title had correct capitalization. There is a little factual disagreement between the State Park article and the lighthouse article. The article you've created for the lighthouse indicated that it is privately owned whereas the State Park article states that its owned by the state now. You might wanna clarify. Cornell Rockey 20:25, 13 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

milk

Although your imput is appreciated, the recent edits you made to milk are not in line with wikipedia's NPOV policy. I suggest you read through this first before posting further. Cheers, Halogenated (talk) 05:31, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You need to take a critical look at the source you're presenting. The site notmilk.com is incredible biased towards a POV considered not scientifically viable, or reasonable. The author(s) are presenting a highly one-sided case with little peer-reviewed references, and those that are given are highly selective. There are many reasonable arguments that persuade against the consumption of milk, but this website does not do justice to most.

Cheers Halogenated (talk) 07:04, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

notmilk.com is clearly a one sided affair. Having looked over many of the articles on the site, many are not peer-reviewed publications and instead are editiorialised (read-highly biased); this is hardly scientific. I should not have to "look past" the home page, because it sets the entire point of the page, which is anything but a NPOV. Again, I implore you to read up on what constitutes acceptable reference material on wikipedia. There is certainly a small amount of wiggle-room, and perhaps links to the specific articles might be appropriate, but definitely NOT the page notmilk.com - this is clearly being enforced by administrators and editors alike. It's not a matter of balancing viewpoints, but instead providing information and references that are as minimally biased as possible. The article already has a section discussing potential health issues associated with milk, and after much diligence to weed out the barrage of edits by uninformed and misguided individuals we've finally produced something reasonable in it's presentation. I've already made clear that if you or anyone wants to write an article on wikipedia that details this further, I support this, but be aware that doesn't make it a licence to add pages like notmilk.com. Regards, Halogenated (talk) 13:06, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Notmilk

A tag has been placed on Notmilk requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Roleplayer (talk) 21:29, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Gotmilk

A tag has been placed on Gotmilk, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which 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 our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Nk.sheridan Talk 21:33, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]