User talk:Georgesummer

December 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Nick Perri has been reverted. Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove links which are discouraged per our external links guideline from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. I removed the following link(s): http://www.myspace.com/nickperri (matching the regex rule \bmyspace\.com). If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other, constructive, changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 23:23, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Sinai
First off, I don't "keep adding it", I've added it back once, and that's because you keep removing it without explanation in the edit summary, and haven't contributed to the discussion about this on the discussion page. Secondly, management firm or not, that doesn't give you authority on whether or not it should go on their wikipedia page. If people can find a reliable source, there's no reason not to have it on there, a different original lead singer is definitely notable. Sergecross73  msg me   13:59, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, the link was there when I added it, but now is down. But you really should put something in your edit summaries. You know, say what you said on my talk page, but when you make the actual edit. Sergecross73   msg me   03:13, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
 * So I can't help but think that you, as "band management", is doing something to get rid of these sources. Is this true? Sergecross73   msg me   20:26, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

FYI Conflict of interest guidelines
Welcome to Wikipedia. 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. 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, 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; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with 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 a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Hairhorn (talk) 15:57, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Sinai (band)


The article Sinai (band) has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable band. The article was created by an account that acknowledges he's the band's manager. Only one semi-reliable website can be found, apart from their own, that gives information about them, and the information is scant and out of date.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SlimVirgin TALK |  CONTRIBS 23:22, 25 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I saw you remove the prod tag when you made your other edits, but it's not clear whether this was intentional. Are you contesting the article's deletion? SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 03:56, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Sinai (band)
Please don't nominate pages for speedy deletion when there are acceptable versions to revert to (and in this case I don't see the need for reverts at all). And please don't blank talk pages for entries just becase you don't like what's there. Thanks. Hairhorn (talk) 13:41, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Hairhorn, but I created this page (big mistake) and it has been overrun by people "claiming to know" the facts which are distorted, twisted, and in some case just plain wrong. In order to protect the integrity of the band, I am nominating it for speedy deletion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgesummer (talk • contribs)
 * Ah, this is a clear case of Wikipedia's Law of Unintended Consequences. Creating an article doesn't bestow the right to control its content. In fact just the opposite is true, by creating an entry you invite others to contribute. Hairhorn (talk) 20:29, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi George, you were the one who removed the speedy deletion (prod) tag here. Are you saying you would like it to be restored? SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 13:51, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes, I am indeed. If the facts are not going to be laid out properly, and this page is just becoming a battleground for egos, yes, I'd rather see it go. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Georgesummer (talk • contribs)


 * Wikipedia isn't advertising space. What we try to do is construct articles out of independent sources, and we don't published unsourced material. The material you're trying to remove has been independently published, so we publish it too, but the problem is that hardly anything has been published about this band, so we have to use whatever is out there. The best thing is not to create or edit articles about issues you have close personal involvement in. See Conflict of interest and What Wikipedia is not.


 * Anyway, I've restored the original prod rationale that you removed. If no one objects within I think it's seven days, the page can be deleted. SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 14:50, 3 February 2011 (UTC)


 * George, please stop editing the article. If you want to make suggestions, do so on the talk page. Many thanks, SlimVirgin  TALK |  CONTRIBS 14:52, 3 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Also, you don't have any more of a "right" to anything about the article than anyone else. The fact that you created the article doesn't mean anything, and the fact that you manage them, actually creates a conflict of interest, as you've been instructed above. I think you seem to have wikipedia mistakenly mixed in with band fansites/myspaces/facebooks/twitters etc.


 * That being said, I don't think I'd challenge the fact that it needs to be deleted, just letting you know for the future... Sergecross73   msg me   18:28, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

File:Sinaipress1.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Sinaipress1.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. —Bkell (talk) 21:09, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nickperi perriinkguitars 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nickperi perriinkguitars 1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nick Perri Onstage.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nick Perri Onstage.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:00, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nick live 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nick live 1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Walt live 1.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Walt live 1.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:01, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Nick without tat.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Nick without tat.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. / ƒETCH COMMS  /  02:02, 22 December 2011 (UTC)

COI
You claim in editing Nick Perri that you are not working for him and having no "direct ties". But you;
 * Uploaded a photo from his official facebook page
 * Claiming to have rights to it.
 * Because the photographer "granted us rights to use the photo where ever we wanted".

Who is "we"? While you may have rights to use the photo, that is not the same as licensing it under cc so that it may appear on Wikipeda. -- Escape Orbit (Talk) 23:18, 17 April 2012 (UTC)


 * You made it pretty clear here that you have a direct connection to this artist. Hairhorn (talk) 00:38, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * (edit conflict) (I'm referring to the same thing Hairhorn is.) Furthermore, in the past you claimed you managed/had connections to SINAI, a band Perri played in. As such, don't remove the WP:COI tag from his page. Thanks. Sergecross73   msg me   00:40, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Nick Perri
Since you have a conflict of interest on this page, please don't take the initiative yourself to remove the conflict of interest tag. If this isn't clear to you, please have a look at WP:COI. Hairhorn (talk) 17:58, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Multiple accounts
Per the evidence presented at Sockpuppet investigations/Georgesummer, it has been shown that you have used an undeclared alternate account to make edits to Nick Perri and Talk:Nick Perri. While operating multiple accounts is not forbidden, operating them in this manner is a violation of policy, and as such, your alternate account has been blocked. I have decided to not block your main account at this time, but further editing in violation of the conflict of interest guideline, the sockpuppetry policy or other policies or guidelines mentioned above on this page will likely result in the loss of your editing privileges. Regards ​—DoRD (talk)​ 18:06, 19 June 2012 (UTC)