User talk:Blondifox

Welcome to Wikipedia. I saw how you edited or created Blondfox Records, and I noticed that the username you have chosen, "Blondifox", seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of something other than yourself. Please note that you may not edit on behalf of a company, group, institution, product, or website, and Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are promotional or have the appearance of shared use. If you are willing to use a personal account, please take a moment to create a new account or request a username change that represents only yourself as an individual. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and remember that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. --Drm310 (talk) 06:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Rebuttal
I know that my username is of close resemblance to the Blondfox Records name, because it was of a personal account LONG before Blondfox Records ever existed. It is a kind of 'pet name' or an internet name per-say. I am not in any way trying to advertise Blondfox records in any way by having my username as Blondifox. The conflict of interest guidelines seem to have me put in the spot, seeing as I am the owner of said company. If my page has to be removed, so be it.

But I would prefer that someone of no prior recollection of my company was to evaluate my page, and fix any problems that might of come out of my Bias. I tried to write it as unbiased as possible, that is why I did not leave a description of the company, but merely straightforward facts about it. I'm sorry if I wasted any of your time, you seem to be quite the intelligent individual. --Blondifox (talk) 03:28, 3 October 2012 (EST)


 * Hi, Blondifox. Third-party here. I can't comment on the page you wrote (because I have not seen it), but I will comment on the username. I think there's some gray area, but in all I'd say it's name that you would be okay in keeping. If you plan to stay around Wikipedia for an extended time, it may be good to change so this issue is not brought up again, but my assessment is that it would not be strictly necessary. Have a good one. NTox · talk 04:13, 7 October 2012 (UTC)

Deletion discussion about Blondfox Records
Hello, Blondifox,

I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Blondfox Records should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Articles for deletion/Blondfox Records.

If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

Thanks, Batard0 (talk) 07:55, 11 October 2012 (UTC)