User talk:TomSkillingJr.

Hello, TomSkillingJr., and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Manual of Style
Also feel free to make test edits in the sandbox.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to leave me a message. Umalee 00:56, 23 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

regarding an article that is an autobiography, un-noteworthy, and bias. (A COPY FOR MY TALK PAGE)

I am unclear where i state arguments for deletion articles. however, i wanted to point out an article "Cory Williams" Mr. Safety is clearly violating TOS.

the basic outline for the argument and dispute follows:

A. the article is an autobiography and blatant advertisement of "self-promotion" / ie: (see User_talk:Viralmediaman) [[1]] it is important to note that user denials any involvement and /or connection with Cory Williams nor Direct Tv THE FIZZ

B. the aritcle completely bias, and lacks notability

C. the article inaccurate and reads like spam

going on further, Cory aka Mr. Safety is a just a random guy that uploads youtube clips and openly admits to cheating. this where safety admits to cheating as well as on his youtube channel it says "Watched: 418,88" videos. somehow i doubt he was able to legitimately watch that maybe videos. it's really bizarre in my opinion that he blames "his friend".

in conclusion, the following is Cory Williams admitting to cheating,

"HERE'S HOW I "CHEATED".... This all started while I was on a music tour back in March 2006. A good friend of mine offered to help promote me while I was away, so I left my account in his hands and offered him compensation for his help. At the time, I didn't feel the need to question his methods. Back then, I only used YouTube as a host to put my videos on myspace and that was about it. When I got home, started making videos again and noticed a few things were different on my YouTube account. I was still fairly new to YouTube because I only uploaded to it... but my number of "watched" videos was at 400,000 and I knew there was no way he could have possibly watched that many videos. So I asked him where that number came from and he told me how he did it. After that, I took back my account because I knew his method of promoting was wrong and a URL refresher was never used on my account again. Even though I made this video confession, many people still don't believe my situation, but I can understand why. Although, I will not let this mistake or the people who don't believe me, effect the way I do videos. I am not a cheater and I will never be a cheater and I would never risk the consequences of cheating. I have worked very hard at what I do and I will not go down because of one petty mistake such as this. If YouTube thought I was a cheater, then they would have banned my account a long time ago. Cheating did not get me ANY new subscribers and even if it did, then it was because THEY chose to subscribe because THEY enjoyed my videos. When this all happened, I only had around 400 subscribers. The refresher that was used only got my old videos a bunch of views. Many of the videos that were refreshed didn't even show up on the most viewed list because they were over 48 hours old. My total number of video views as of April 27th 2007 is 7 million views, so if 400,000 of them are fake from the incedent, then 6.6 million of those views are legit. Here's another roomer I'd like to clear up... I have never created fake accounts for more subscriptions nor do I add fake comments or ratings. As of early 2006, all my stats are legit (minus the 400,000 fake views/watches from the incedent). Many of my subscribers came from Myspace once I became more active in the YouTube community. (I have over 20,000 friends on myspace) Some people said I should have deleted my account and started over again after the incedent, but what good would that have done? Hiding what happened to me would have been worse than coming out and talking about it in public. No matter what I do, this will always be a part of my story... so why not tell it like it is. For those who refuse to believe me, I forgive you. For those who do, thank you. -Cory "Mr. Safety" " In conclusion, its clear he is now cheating the terms of service for wikipedia. Thank you for time and consider on this issue of bias, neutrality, and advertising spam TomSkillingJr.

PS something to think about [2] or [3]

Regarding Mr Safety

hi umalee, article "Cory Williams" Mr. Safety needs serious attention and expert assistance. the basic issue is Cory Williams clearly wrote / created his own article as a form of blatant advertising. Cory Williams is not noteworthy in my opinion, as well as others that have debated and discussed the issue at hand. Clearly the Cory Williams article has violated TOS, and this issue with bias and neutrality needs expert help. thanks kindly TomSkillingJr.

IMO, the thing to do would be to get the statement you wrote in the section above in the articles talk page. Since you seem to feel very strongly about this, I would remind you to be calm, and civil, but I don't think you would have too much of a problem with that. --Umalee 02:11, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Umalee, you're the second user (?) that has suggested that i quote "calm down". i feel very strongly on this issue, because the article is blatant advertising and bias resume created by Cory Williams to help propagandate his "career". I (myself) have been on tv, in paper, and on youtube. does that mean i deserve an article on wikipedia so i can google myself ? clearly, the answer is no. i apologize if i have some emotion attached to this issue. i guess i will try to calm down. possibly its something i should read up on. because the focus is turning to into a argument rather than an open civil debate.

to me the its civil to ask , "is it okay to write your own wikipedia articles (about your life and self) in an online encyclopedia ?" in my view point, it's completely bias and unfair to have pages created for people who upload videos to youtube and cheat their terms of service. regardless, i'll read up on how to cool down, i must have lost my point somewhere. Can you (and others) tell i am upset that the article is written like an self-advertisement for a man who openly cheated Youtube.com? thanks for advice. i'll read up on policy further TomSkillingJr.

Yes, I think it is perfectly civil to ask that. I guess I might've been a little premature in warning you however, and I apologize. However, you do seem to feel rather strongly about it, and as you said, you do seem to a little upset, and that's why I asked you to read the policy. --Umalee 18:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No, i think its great that you warned me since i had no clue. basically, i feel middle ground and wouldn't want to sound upset or uncivil. over all, i'm upset with the basic nature of the articles. thanks so much for helping me undertand everything. TomSkillingJr.

A favor

Hey there. A quick note - you appear to have the "mark all edits minor" box ticked - it's making your tagging of articles with the speedy tags show up as minor edits, which they definitely are not. Furthermore, a lot of people have their prefs set to ignore all minor edits, so it certainly affects things. Could you consider turning that off, or at least checking the box off if the edit isn't, in fact, minor? Thanks, and keep up the good work. --badlydrawnjeff talk 01:59, 6 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

ill read up on minor checks and edits TomSkillingJr.