User talk:Jwkerastas

Welcome
Hello  and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Ukexpat and I would like to thank you for your contributions.  ''Click here to reply to this message.''  ukexpat (talk) 15:56, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
ukexpat (talk) 15:59, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Draft article
No it's not "live", it is still a draft in your user space. Did you read my second reply at WP:NCHP linked to above? The draft has myriad problems, not the least of which is your conflict of interest. These will have to be resolved before it is moved. You can create the modeling article in draft in user space too - please take a look at WP:YFA or try the article creation wizard. – ukexpat (talk) 16:18, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Email address
It is generally a poor idea to have your email address on your user page, unless you want lots of email spam. You can set your email in your preferences, confirm it, and enable the "email this user" feature, then any user can send you email via the site but your email isn't copied all over the net. DES (talk) 20:50, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
comments on your draft article. DES (talk) 20:58, 27 January 2010 (UTC)

User:Jwkerastas/SmartSignal
I saw your note about User:Jwkerastas/SmartSignal on Requests for feedback. The refs aren't screwed up exactly, that is what happens when you use the form "[URL]" as the content of a ref. It is really better not to use bare URLs as refs anyway, proper publication metadata should be provided. I will insert Citation templates into the draft article. Those are not required, but IMO can be very helpful.

By the way, when you want to draw the attention of a particular editor on Wikipedia, it is best to put a note on that editor's user talk page (in my case User talk:DESiegel). There is no telling how soon a user will check some other page. The talkback template can be used to announce that there are messages for a user on some other page. DES (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2010 (UTC)


 * I have fixed up the reference formatting, and made use of named references when the same reference is cited more than once. But this still needs much work. The outline format must go, with that content being rewritten into prose. And the tone must be kept strictly factual, nothing that even hints of promotional language, given the conflict of interest issues here. If there have been published criticisms or negative comments about the company, they absolutely should be included. DES (talk) 17:37, 29 January 2010 (UTC)