User talk:Bikerfan547

February 2009
You should wait for others to write an article about subjects in which you are personally involved. This applies to articles about you, your achievements, your band, your business, your publications, your website, your relatives, and any other possible conflict of interest.

Creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged. If you create such an article, it might be listed on articles for deletion. Deletion is not certain, but many feel strongly that you should not start articles about yourself. This is because independent creation encourages independent validation of both significance and verifiability. All edits to articles must conform to No original research, Neutral point of view, and Verifiability.

If you are not "notable" under Wikipedia guidelines, creating an article about yourself may violate the policy that Wikipedia is not a personal webspace provider and would thus qualify for speedy deletion. If your achievements, etc., are verifiable and genuinely notable, and thus suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later. (See Wikipedians with articles.)  Wuhwuzdat (talk) 20:49, 26 February 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) 20:49, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Why is our page being deleted? It is not spam. It is no different than the "spam" at a competitors article titled "bedandbreakfast.com"
 * Then that link should probably be deleted too. Just because another similar link exists elsewhere doesn't make it right. Also, even if the link is a reputable site, simply adding it to a large number of pages in rapid sucession is still called spamming. Ten Pound Hammer  and his otters • (Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP) 20:52, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

helpme Wikipedia is a system in which people can continually keep going from article to article by clicking on a term to learn more. "American Historic Inns" is mentioned in the "bed and breakfast" article, and I know, based on the popularity of this book, people would like to know who american historic inns is before they click on the ISBN link. The two reasons stated in this talk page as to why our article was getting deleted was not the reason previously mentioned. We were getting flagged for external link spam - even when the last revision had only one external link. The second reason said something about advertising, which we aren't. We are giving a bio of who we are and why the user should be interested in the book. Go ahead and delete bedandbreakfast.com if you want to be fair and review everyone the same. I am an editor on DMOZ, and I often times see people deleting websites without understanding the full picture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisiloveinns (talk • contribs) — Chrisiloveinns (talk • contribs) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because it has been identified as an account used for promotion of a company or group, with a username that implies that this has been done by that company or group. See FAQ/Organization and Conflict of interest''.

This kind of activity is considered spamming and forbidden by policies, and also violates our username policy.

However, if you feel that there has been a mistake in your blocking, please appeal this block by adding the text   or email the administrator who blocked you. Your reason should include your response to this issue and a new username you wish to adopt that does not violate our username policy (specifically, understand that accounts are for individuals, not companies or groups, and that your username should reflect this). Please check that your new username has not already been taken by checking this list. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:19, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

So far, it seems like all of your edits on Wikipedia have been related to your own web site. Under the conflict of interest guidelines, we all agree to refrain from editing about ourselves or our own businesses or web sites. Now that you know you won't be writing about your web site, do you still want an active account? What else do you think you'll be writing about? -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 22:59, 26 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Ok, I think I understand. The article "bed and breakfast" includes the "American Historic Inns" book as a reference.  You want to be able to update the bed and breakfast article when a new version of that book is released. This is okay or slightly touchy depending on exactly what you would be updating.  If you would be updating only the reference entry (that is, information about the book itself), that's fine for you to do on your own.  I also think it's fine for you to add information to bed and breakfast as it's an area of expertise, not an area where you have a conflict of interest.  The only kind of edit that could be troublesome is if you edit the article to mention or reference your book substantially more than it does now: if that's your aim, I would just like you to agree to suggest such edits on the Talk:Bed and breakfast discussion page rather than making them yourself: they will probably be seen as helpful by others and incorporated, which avoids any concern about the article being tainted by conflict of interest.  Do you agree?  Or am I misunderstanding something?  Mango juice talk 18:25, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I am somewhat uncomfortable about your comment above, Bikerfan, "I don't think it's fair to have false information posted on another article about a company without that company being able to change it." This seems to show a weak understanding of the stringency of our rules on conflict of interest. It also implies that "a company" can do something here. No company is permitted to do anything on Wikipedia; only individual human beings can edit here, and those human beings must abide by our rules about conflict of interest, neutral point of view, etc. I'm not going to re-block you; but be aware that more than one editor will be watching your edits when you resume editing. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  20:46, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying.