User talk:M0z

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 11:08, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Group buying
Hello M0z, this is the correct way to communicate directly with other editors. The group buying articles tend to invite a lot of spam links, so the general approach I take, and I imagine a few other editors feel the same way, is that if there's anything even a little suspicious about a link it should be removed. When I clicked through to The Dealer it reminded me very strongly of other blogs run by sites that operate as portals to group buying. The problem is two-fold. In the case of The Dealer, the site does offer a service which while free to the user, looks like it might have some kind of connection with the product (group buying deals) being pushed. It might be a totally independent service someone set up out of the goodness of their heart but ultimately it does promote someone's product which makes it problematical. The other issue is that as a blog it does not appear to be a reliable source WP:RS. Because it does exist to promote a product (group buying and getting people to subscribe to its service) it appears to have a conflict of interest. Related to this the blog does not appear to be notable by Wikipedia standards. We can, sometimes, use a blog as a source in articles, but it needs to be something that is well-known and generally regarded as a good source by the rest of the Internet world. For instance the Huffington Post is primarily a collection of blogs by people who are well known and respected (generally speaking) for their editorials. This blog gets very few comments and I see nothing to indicate that it is written by people who are well-known and respected by the general public (a quick test is to see if the authors have their own Wikipedia articles. This doesn't prove anything either way but is a helpful piece of evidence).

Finally, I fixed the Wall Street Journal link. SQGibbon (talk) 14:59, 7 June 2011 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for explaining. I appreciate your feedback. I do, however, think that there are several blogs from commercial sites that offer quality content - so I hope this isn't a cover-all rule. The Yipit and Campaign Master blog, for example, are both considered expert sources in their respective industries. The Dealer does have some relevance here, but not at the same level. Thanks for fixing the link. M0z (talk) 00:54, 8 June 2011 (UTC)


 * Hello M0z, you seem to be editing from a server farm. Can you disable your proxy to edit? Is there any reason you need to edit from a web server? -- zzuuzz (talk) 14:10, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey Zzuuzz, sorry I didn't get back to your question - I hadn't signed in for some time. I have to go through a proxy for various reasons. I may look for another provider. Thanks.M0z (talk) 22:44, 6 November 2011 (UTC)

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, M0z, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! -Vaarsivius ("You've made a glorious contribution to science.") 21:44, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style
 * Yeah, i'm a bit late on this... -Vaarsivius ("You've made a glorious contribution to science.") 21:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks buddy!M0z (talk) 21:45, 10 November 2011 (UTC)

Editing Wikipedia
Hello, thanks for joining Wikipedia! I notice that you mention that you work in the industry you edit articles on, this makes me worried that you may have some connection, or "conflict of interest" with them, such as that you are an employee or contractor or being paid for editing Wikipedia to market companies you edit on.

This isn't necessarily a problem, but if this is so, you must immediately file a disclosure statement explaining any conflict of interest to ensure transparency. Here's an example of what a disclosure looks like - but let me know if you have any kind of questions about this, privately by email is fine if you’re having problems. You should also ensure that all your edits are factual and cannot be considered in any way promotional, and are backed up by citations to reliable sources demonstrating them to be true. An automated message explaining this is added below. Hope this is OK, let me know if you have any thoughts or questions. Blythwood (talk) 01:13, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hi Blythwood, thanks for letting me know - I wasn't aware that you could outline your relationship. I'll do this now. Thanks again! M0z (talk) 02:22, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello, M0z. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.
 * Great, thanks. As you may know, two earlier attempts at posting this article by other accounts got deleted - yours is much better and I don't see any problem with it at all. You'll need to disclose relevant affiliation if you have a commercial relationship with this company. The details are here. You don't need to give your personal name, just the company you work for/operate under the name of. Hope that's OK. Blythwood (talk) 02:59, 21 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks Blythwood, I'm just helping out in this case, but I have added the connection tag. I'm glad the current content is OK - thanks for reviewing. 1.144.96.94 (talk) 04:56, 21 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:Temple-and-webster-logo.png


The file File:Temple-and-webster-logo.png has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Unused; superseded by File:Temple & Webster Logo.svg"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. – Pbrks (t • c) 03:06, 17 January 2022 (UTC)