User talk:MarcoDFW

Welcome!
Hello, MarcoDFW, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type helpme on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! ArglebargleIV (talk) 15:40, 7 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The thread is AutomaticBackup.Frigerio-ar. Thank you.


 * yes I'm recreating the same page but changing the name as I was informed under TALK to do so?
 * Calm down and read this (copied from your article talkpage):
 * I've deleted the two versions with different titles - we only like one copy of an article to be up. In answer to your query, the other pages you list are irrelevant - see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. They might bear a closer look, or they might actually show notability. Not everything gets an article. If you get better referencing (better than a page that doesn't even seem to mention your thing...), maybe. If this goes the way of all flesh (and a lot of software), find better refs and contact me to have it exhumed for reviving. Peridon (talk) 18:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Please sign on talk pages with four ~ things - and when editing, please be logged in. IP adresses don't let us know who's talking. Peridon (talk) 18:53, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * BTW being free doesn't matter. Charities and multinationals are treated just the same. Peridon (talk) 18:56, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * OK Got it! could you please unflag the page and help me to get the page to the point to be worthy to be in wiki, I will do everything in my part to provide what is needed? or How can I do that? the message will go automatically? how do I know is worthy according to the rules, as I said earlier I copy the source code of another page that is not flagged I didn't delete references not links to relevant pages and even delete anything Cobian Backup had of self promoting?

MarcoDFW (talk) 19:10, 10 September 2012 (UTC)
 * It's now at User:MarcoDFW/AutomaticBackup.Frigerio-ar. Now get your refs. Read the RS policy, and dig deep. Peridon (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2012 (UTC)


 * Hello Peridon, I have modified a bit the page. Could you please check if my referencesUser:MarcoDFW/AutomaticBackup.Frigerio-ar? MarcoDFW (talk) 16:15, 11 September 2012 (UTC)
 * OKayyyyy. CNET is a 'Publisher's Description'. No good for notability. Gizmo still doesn't seem to mention YOU. The general idea, yes. You, no. Top Ten - where are you? (Damned if I'd pay $300 for something when most are way less - even Norton's only $50!!!! Free's even better - I use, recommend and install various free things for security.) Get rid of the list. I don't care what BloggsCo's backup program StickIt RS has in its article (don't look for it - that's a Peridon invention and rather rude too) - this is an encyclopaedia and articles should be written not listed (unless they are Lists, in which case they're not articles...). Most important - why is it? Important, that is. Why is it not just another piece of software designed to show how good the designer is so someone will give him/her (not many hers...) a 9 to 5 job? Over to you. Peridon (talk) 20:59, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks Peridon, now I'm learning something... I also been exchanging information with another WIKI user and been really helpful also. If you search by "Automatic backup" in Google or yahoo I'm in the first page of the search right below carbonite, so to answer the Top Ten question I'm in the first page. Other pages like forums and blogs do not count as I was told, but check this links done by third parties, check this references I know they are not good but still   . Now, I learn faster when I copy something that works and go from there, so help me to understand what is the main difference between Cobian Backup and Automatic Backup so far I can't see a better sources than the ones I listed, main difference he has his website hosted at the university servers, which he doesn't even mention in his page? I Immensely grateful for your comments and help! BTW I would like to list again by the name of AutomaticBackup drop frigerio-ar, by the way Cobian is his last name also. When you said get rid of the list' you mean the list of features? cobian does have it too, what am I doing wrong here. MarcoDFW (talk) 22:10, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Quite right - your reference (no 's') is better than theirs (both the same and their own site. Now tagged. Google search placing means nothing here. Too easily fixed. (Not implying anything - it just is. That's what SEO is about.) The name? Main article should be the real name. If AutomaticBackup isn't used for a disam(biguation) page or anything else, it can be a redirect. Worry about that later. Forget deviantart. And anything where anyone can post. (Like here...) Must be a staff writer. Getjealous I'll investigate tomorrow. You're getting the idea, I think. Many don't. Peridon (talk) 22:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Don't assume that an existing article is the be all and end all. I can't quickly see why that one's survived so long - except that when it was born, things were more relaxed. WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. A hoax that had been up for six years was caught not long ago. By a patroller using the Random Page button. Just goes to show how times have changed - it would never have stood a chance against our current patrollers. Peridon (talk) 22:27, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * The list is non-encyclopaedic and looks like a brochure listing. You know what I mean. I hope. Peridon (talk) 22:29, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Now we're getting some progress, I do understand what is going on now. Thanks! I'm clear now. I would like you to check one more link as a reference for Automatic Backup, as it turned out ABS was show-cased in a magazine PCUtilities @ http://www.magnesiummedia.com could this qualified for a more reliably source?. Again Peridon thanks a bunch, now I have it clear. Just a side note, from the List of backup software you will have to nominate more than the half as pretty much all show similar conditions than Cobian. No Worries now I do know what I have to look for. Just as a thought, it could be nice to have a button to prof a wiki page before submitting, that will make all of us life easier.MarcoDFW (talk) 03:43, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * That particular link, no. To an article in one of their publications giving reasonably in depth review of your thing, maybe. Partly depends on the way it's written. Things like set piece interviews with the CEO where the PR Dept has very obviously written all the replies are no good no matter where they're published. Peridon (talk) 10:22, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * thanks, so that means my article will not be accepted? right, is there any hope? can I do something instead?. If not, I guess I hit the wall as my cited references and links are not relevant enough to be considered as encyclopedic. I do 100% understand the rules now, thanks Peridon I just feel discriminated as every one in List of backup software is not following the rules, but you need to start somewhere right. I'm not crying a river just expressing my frustration. But Thanks immensely to you and the time you spent with me (you rock!)MarcoDFW (talk) 14:23, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * There's always hope (well, until the tiger actually starts eating you...). Keep a copy of it at home (or work, I don't care). In spare moments, turn the list into proper encyclopaedic paragraphs. Plug the thing everywhere you can get it plugged legitimately (I don't condone spam, but advertising is a necessary evil - elsewise we'd still be still be using flint because no-one had told us about that bronze stuff that was even recyclable...). And after a few weeks, learn to tag things that shouldn't be here. Not out of self-interest, but out of the desire to make this a better place. Or just delve into things here. It's like an iceberg - 7/8 of it is not seen by the casual visitor. Good luck, whichever. Peridon (talk) 20:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, I guess this is my last question I swear. When you say Plug the thing everywhere you can get it plugged legitimately you probably imply to promote my website within legit reviewers and relevant software critics right? Second, when you say Keep a copy of it at home (or work, I don't care) you meant make a copy because the one at Automatic Backup will be deleted? pr can stay parked here for me to keep tweaking and learning? Again thanks, MarcoDFW (talk) 20:45, 13 September 2012 (UTC)
 * Right. And the copy is because things in userspace can't be kept there for ever. You might miss it being deleted if you're on holiday, say. Keep a backup copy...... Peridon (talk) 21:13, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Automatic Backup Copy


The article Automatic Backup Copy has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable software: refs mostly general (not on topic) or not reliable (blogs, download links), largely promotional written by software's creator. Recreation of previously, multiply, deleted page: see Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard/Archive_59 and User_talk:MarcoDFW.

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. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 21:56, 1 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello thanks for your kind comments, I'm new to WIKI and I have made some mistakes in the past and now haunted for that (previous speed deletion). I'm having a really hard time to understand how fast my page gets nominated in comparison to pages listed in List of backup software with much more self-promotional material and certainly without any nomination like the one I received. Cobian Backup got a very soft message not like mine, and many other in that section have a more promotional material than me or Cobian for that matter. I do understand about the encyclopedic value of each page, but I would like to communicate another alternative also. I would really appreciate if my page is kept as long as the other are in List of backup software, Thanks for your understanding. I do understand if you need to follow the rules and delete mine! I just would like to be in the same group as the other backup wiki pages are! Thanks in advance.

Nomination of Automatic Backup Copy for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Automatic Backup Copy is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Automatic Backup Copy until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 17:21, 5 October 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok I'm sorry.
 * No need to apologise: as the page was de-prodded it has been nominated for deletion via the more formal Afd process, but this means you can make your case to keep it in that discussion: Articles for deletion/Automatic Backup Copy. You can try and persuade other editors while they can try and persuade you, or try and fix the article themselves.-- JohnBlackburne wordsdeeds 17:31, 5 October 2012 (UTC)

File:ABS raked 4th in Brothershoft.png listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:ABS raked 4th in Brothershoft.png, 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. Cloudbound (talk) 22:02, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

What is your purpose here?
I'm sorry, but I just don't see what you are trying to accomplish on Wikipedia. All I was able to find was a web site at automaticbackup.org. Is that yours? I'd be glad to help, but I just don't understand. Thanks. - KitchM (talk) 02:42, 22 August 2013 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Main Screen.png
Thanks for uploading File:Main Screen.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for 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 permissions-en@wikimedia.org, 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 permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use 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 Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

ATTENTION : This is an automated, BOT-generated message. This bot DID NOT nominate your file(s) for deletion; please refer to the page history of each individual file for details. Thanks, FastilyBot (talk) 03:00, 10 November 2016 (UTC)