User talk:IdeaLynx

IdeaLynx, you are invited on a Wikipedia Adventure!
 The Adventure

September 2015
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 21:36, 14 September 2015 (UTC)

I see your point, but you could have simply eliminated anything that violated Wikipedia's rules. There was a lot of good, pertinent and factual information in the edits I posted, including photos of the cemetery. But you decided to take all of the content I contributed down. Why? Are you a Wikipedia employee? --IdeaLynx (talk) 21:52, 14 September 2015 (UTC)
 * You and I are both editors here. Do you have some affiliation with this cemetery? I have experience with the WP:NPOV content policy and recognized content that was overwhelmingly promotional and that replaced more neutral content. There may well have been some facts buried (sorry:) in what you added, and you are welcome to re-insert those details with more neutral/encyclopediac rather than advertising/fluffy tone. DMacks (talk) 07:36, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

They are a client of mine. I handle most of their marketing. I saw that somebody had posted a Wikipedia page and I was just trying to update the information because some of it was incorrect and one of the sources was a broken link. I totally understand not wanting to add anything promotional so with the edits I posted tonight I just tried to state the facts, as I know them. You indicated that two interments need citations, but if you click on the Wikipedia links it'll state that they were both interred at Williamsburg Memorial Park, albeit in different locations within each page. This is all new to me so I'm trying to abide by Wikipedia's guidelines, now that I better understand what they are. IdeaLynx (talk) 07:47, 15 September 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah, that would explain why your first edits were so out of sync with "encyclopedia". You will definitely want to read WP:COI right away, before making any further edits. I clicked the links for those people, and the statements on their biographical articles about where they were buried did not have citations. It doesn't make sense to use the presence of an unverified statement on one page to verify that same statement somewhere else. And unverified statements on any page are subject to removal (Verifiability Policy and Reliable-Sources Guideline), which which would leave the "statement somewhere else" completely unsupported. DMacks (talk) 08:03, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. Sometimes the "marketing me" takes over. I'll read WP:COI before making any future edits. And yes, I understand your unverified statements argument. Makers perfect sense. I'll try to find a citation for both of the people indicated. 108.17.134.243 (talk) 13:42, 15 September 2015 (UTC)