User talk:Patrick24601

Speedy deletion of "Batteryfuel"

A page you created, Batteryfuel, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is about a website, but it does not indicate how it is important or significant, and thus why it should be included in an encyclopedia. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, and the guidelines for websites in particular.

You are welcome to contribute content which complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thanks. Finalnight (talk) 05:30, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Focus Consulting and Training Inc

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Focus Consulting and Training Inc 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 a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.) or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion," which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. - Happysailor ^(Talk) 20:52, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Guidance on notability

Hi Patrick24601,

Wikipedia has its own guidance for notability that may not be the same as your intuitive sense of what is notable. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia of general knowledge rather than an index of profiles of companies and people. Each article needs several independent reliable sources to show significant impact on the historical record. The guidance for organizations is given at WP:ORG and for biographies WP:BIO applies.

If the articles you are creating have reliable sources to support the criteria defined in that guidance then you may have a reason to keep the articles from being deleted which you are welcome to raise on the article talk page or on any linked deletion discussion. If you are associated with the organization, person or product the article is about then you must follow the conflict of interest guidelines and avoid editing the article yourself but you are free to suggest and discuss changes.

Rather than starting "live" articles, you can create a draft first which allows you to get your article properly sourced before risking speedy deletion - see Userspace draft and Userfication.

If you would like some independent help you can ask one of the noticeboards at WP:Requests or try chatting with other Wikipedians on #wikipedia-en-help ^connect.

Thanks, Fæ (talk) 22:11, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Platform may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• ], (renamed to Platform) The Official Organization of public speakers and thought-leaders (formerly National Speakers Association

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:41, 6 July 2014 (UTC)

Platform was scrapped

NSA scrapped the name change to Platform. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:21, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

(I'm not a great wiki editor. I hope this is the right place)

I'm not disputing that. I'm disputing the circumstances and the reason. I posted a better update. I am a member of NSA and was in the room when it was announced. I've also been involved in the discussions as to the internal and external issues that forced the name change back. See my edit.

• First, since you're a NSA member and claim to have participated in the event, please make yourself familiar with our policy on conflicts of interest. Second, Wikipedia uses what is reported by reliable third party sources, such as the one I posted. It does not use what you claim to have discussed. Please see WP:RS and WP:V. Lastly, please be aware that removing well sourced, neutral information without a policy based reason can be viewed as vandalism.Niteshift36 (talk) 15:30, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

• I'm an NSA member. I don't work for them. Since you are likely not an NSA member (staff or otherwise) and are not affiliated with either organization, I'll probably have more factual information than what you are seeing reported in the public. I've seen all of the videos by the president of NSA Shep Hyken (who is a personal friend of mine). I've also been privy to internal discussions on the topic. There are multiple reasons and you posted ONE of many. Your statement was not 100% factual. I am sure that the rules about removing well sourced, neutral information applies to all members including you.
• Patrick, you clearly didn't read the policy I asked you to read. You don't have to be an employee to have a COI. Since you are refusing to read it, I will quote some of it for you: "COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia to promote your own interests, including your business or financial interests, or those of your external relationships, such as with family, friends or employers" You just stated that Hyken is your "personal friend". "Any external relationship – personal, religious, political, academic, financial, and legal – can trigger a conflict of interest.". Again, you claim a personal relationship AND you claim to be personally involved with the discussion. Now, will you go read WP:V and WP:RS or do I need to quote them to you? Niteshift36 (talk) 15:42, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
• There are multiple edits going on so I read things when they get to me. While I am sure you spend plenty of time on Wikipedia and are more familiar with the rules, I am sure you should also know that non-biased information should be posted. You source and reasons for the change do not present a complete picture.

• I left part of your edit intact, but removed the other part. It is a basic principal here that we be able to VERIFY what gets put into article by using RELIABLE SOURCES. Using your personal claims not only violates both of those basic tenants, it violates the policy on original research. I understand that you want to defend your association. That's natural. It's also why I cautioned you to read the COI policy (which you apparently refused to do). You might also want to familiarize yourself with the policy on WP:3RR. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:49, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

July 2014

Hello, Patrick24601. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Niteshift36 (talk) 15:36, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

== This was unnecessary as I have no conflict of interest in my latest stories. My only interest is being sure that a balance and fair picture is being represented. It appears that another Wikiepedia is interested in only posting biased information.

• It is VERY necessary because you have a clear COI. Your edit history backs it up. You're relying on "personal friendships" and undocumented conversations you were involved in. Maybe you should read WP:TRUTH. Wikipedia isn't your PR tool and we don't use your personal word as a source. Try following the policies, not your agenda to shape a public perception. Additionally, I need to post the warning so that I can show evidence that you were warned if you continue to edit with a COI and admin involvement becomes necessary. In looking at your activity, I see you also tried to place an article for your own company, so this isn't your first brush with a COI. Niteshift36 (talk) 16:08, 16 July 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Sheri's Living Room

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Sheri's Living Room 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 an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. --Animalparty-- (talk) 05:21, 3 June 2015 (UTC)