User talk:Berzerker prime

Geek kon
It is obvious from your edit summary in the article that you are very close to the subject. I want you to be aware that there is a conflict of interest guideline. You need to be aware that you write in from an encyclopedic point of view. Below is a boilerplate comment on the situation. Royal broil 20:30, 24 June 2007 (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 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 you must always:
 * 1) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Accounts used solely for blatant self-promotion may be blocked without further warning.

For more details, please read the Conflict of Interest guideline. Royal broil 20:30, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

Geek.Kon origins
Thanks for the information about Geek.Kon's origins. Unfortunately, you didn't provide a citation. Your edit summary said, "update to the info of the convention's origins from primary source (involved member)". That would be original research on your part, and unfortunately Wikipedia requires no original research. Your addition was essentially uncited, while the sentence you replaced did have a citation. Sure, The Daily Cardinal is hardly the paragon of journalism, but it is verifiable third party coverage. As such, I've reverted your edit. My suggestion: Ask Geek.Kon to write up their own history on their web site. Ideally not in the forums, as forums aren't terribly trusted, instead as a page on the main site. Then you can cite that as a verifiable primary source. — Alan De Smet | Talk 03:58, 27 February 2008 (UTC)