User talk:Medianyc

Welcome
Hello, Medianyc, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. 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   and your question on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers: We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126;. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! --A NobodyMy talk 17:40, 6 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The Five Pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style

observer
Hi, I've noticed that all your edits have been adding references to recent Observer articles. What is your relation to the publication? ccwaters (talk) 13:36, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I've reverted your recent edit to Barbara Kingsolver which seems quite inappropriate. A certain literary agent chose to submit a book to a contest established by Kingsolver. You added this fact to the *lead* of Kingsolver's article? In your opinion, is this one of the most important things that all our readers need to know about Kingsolver herself? That this guy chose to submit a book he was promoting to her contest? Please take a look at WP:SPAM to become familiar with our policies. Take a look at the WP:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard for a complaint about your editing. You may respond there if you wish. EdJohnston (talk) 04:25, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Your update at WP:COIN
Hello Medianyc. Your submission to COIN inadvertently restored an old version of the noticeboard, and I have re-entered your comment at WP:COIN. In your future editing, I hope you plan to address the concerns previously expressed: If your only interest is going to be adding links to the NY Observer to articles, it may reduce your effectiveness as a bona-fide Wikipedia editor, since you won't learn much about what makes a good article by our standards. To remedy the problem, consider an alternative. Go ahead and *propose* addition of links on each article's Talk page first, and leave it to others to make the decision. EdJohnston (talk) 20:23, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) A high error rate, as much as 50%. For instance, a Cheever biography entered as a reference in an article about Richard Yates.
 * 2) Inappropriate placement of NY Observer references in articles where they don't belong. For instance, something about a literary agent who submitted a book to a contest run by Barbara Kingsolver was added to the *lead* of her article, while it had no interest at all for readers of the Kingsolver article.