User talk:Arthur Morello

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

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of Infinitink and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 13:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam); and,
 * 4) avoid breaching relevant 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 conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 13:34, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Infinitink
A tag has been placed on Infinitink, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing no content to the reader. Please note that external links, "See also" section, book reference, category tag, template tag, interwiki link, rephrasing of the title, or an attempt to contact the subject of the article don't count as content. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template   to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Wuhwuzdat (talk) 14:07, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

User page
Hi, please note that Wikipedia is not a free web host or a place to put advertising. If you want to work on an article about tattoos, please do so at Tattoo, but keep in mind our external link policy. Happy editing! --fvw *  22:26, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Tattoo
Can you please tell me why you removed my insert on tattoos? I did not violate any of the guidelines - or did I? Thanks! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur Morello (talk • contribs) 22:51, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * The product in question is hardly notable enough to be discussed on the main tattoo page, which is a general high level article about tattoos. It may be appropriate for a mention on the temporary tattoo page, but even then you'd have to provide some secondary sources (newspaper articles and such) that show to significance of the product. Also, please keep in mind that accounts created purely to promote a product are generally not viewed favourably. --fvw *  23:06, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
 * This looks like pretty blatant violation of WP:ADVERT; moreover, you have repeatedly inserted the same spam across multiple articles. I assume you have a WP:COI that is making you wish to advertise this product.  It's the sort of thing that gets editors blocked pretty quickly, I'd watch out for that if I were you.  LotLE × talk  18:43, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Disclosure
For the sake of full disclosure, I do have a COI relating to removable tattoos and tattoo ink. I work for Freedom2 and have no shame in admitting my love for this product. Nonetheless, I do not think that an editor at Wikipedia can in good conscience delete a product covered by The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and Time Magazine. I also find your description of my entry as 'spam' laughable. This product is a revolutionary product and the world deserves to be educated about it.

My entry on henna cited an article from The New England Journal of Medicine that highlighted the dangers of henna tattoos. Given that this section on tattooing requested more primary references, I think this entry meets every qualification as a relevant entry.

As one who has a lot of valuable information to contribute on a variety of subjects, after this experience, I might think twice before doing so.

My repeated attempts to post seemingly only end in frustration. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Arthur Morello (talk • contribs) 22:28, 13 January 2009 (UTC)


 * A lot of folks do make a rough start at editing WP. There is something to learn about both the culture and the policies.  Try editing in an area where you don't have an obvious WP:COI as a good way to start.  The fact you love the product of the company where you work definitely suggests that you are not a good judge of WP:WEIGHT concerns in the article.
 * As I stated in edit comments, the problem with you henna description isn't verifiability. Obviously NEJM is a gold-standard reliable source.  The problem was it's not particularly relevant to the article where you added the material.  As I commented, it quite likely would be relevant to the article on henna tattoos.  LotLE × talk  22:50, 13 January 2009 (UTC)