User talk:Mironearth

License tagging for Image:AskMeNow-Smart-Alec.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:AskMeNow-Smart-Alec.gif. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 02:06, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

AskMeNow
Please do not add links to AskMeNow onto only tangentially related articles, such as those about specific brands of mobile phone. This comes across as spamming. Indeed, your entire editing pattern so far seems as if you are simply trying to promote that particular product. That sort of thing is heavily frowned upon here. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 10:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Please do not remove warnings from your talk page. This is usually seen as a way to hide the fact that people have criticised your actions. If you disagree with what I say, please feel free to engage with it, as you have done on my talk page, but do not simply delete the criticism.


 * The reason that I removed AskMeNow but not Windows Live Search from pages about mobile search is because they are completely different products. AskMeNow, from everything I can see about it, is a manual question-and-answer service (backed up with a database of previously-asked questions) rather than anything to do with search at all. The only mention I can find of search in the sources is in the company's own press releases, where it has started calling itself "a leader in intelligent mobile search" but still gives no notion that it's anything other than a Q&A service like 82ASK or AQA. Wikipedia policy on reliable sources considers press releases to be self-published material which is to be given a much lower weight than, for example, the Wireless Week article which doesn't mention search at all. Incidentally, most of what you have added to the AskMeNow article is a direct copy of what's in the sources - that's a copyright violation, and by Wikipedia policy (and US law) must be removed.


 * Believe me, I have no axe to grind about AskMeNow in particular - I'd never heard of it until a couple of days ago. I do have an axe to grind about people using Wikipedia to promote their own commercial products (especially when they try to promote it as something it's not). --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:58, 15 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I maybe overreacted a bit there. It's often hard for new users to appreciate the culture of Wikipedia, and the subtleties of what's acceptable. The substance of what I said above still stands, but I expressed myself badly, and in particular I didn't assume good faith. I went in all guns blazing, assuming that you'd deliberately set out to cause problems to Wikipedia. Sorry about that.


 * However, I think it's probably reasonable for me to assume that you either work for or are in some way connected with AskMeNow. In that case, you should definitely have a look at the guidelines on conflict of interest. Basically, it says that if you are personally connected with a product, company or person, you should be very careful about editing their entry - it's often better to suggest things on the article talk page first and let other users, who can come at it totally neutrally, decide what should be in the article. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 17:00, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the most recent edits it seems I'm not the only person who has a problem with the tone of that article. Given that I have clearly failed to act to the highest Wikipedian standards, it's best if I stand aside and let others sort things out. I won't be editing AskMeNow again (though I might chip in on the talk page). I would recommend once more that you read the guidelines on conflict of interest. --OpenToppedBus - Talk to the driver 09:54, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

AskMeNow
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. RxS 06:32, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Windows Live Search Mobile
When did I say I didn't have a problem with it? My first reaction would be to say that Windows is a much (much) better known tool then askmenow. In any case, your edits are considered spam by myself and several other editors. I'll look at your additions to that article and will continue to remove advert sounding material.

I will also consider ongoing spamming vandalism, and after the appropriate number of warnings will consider a short block to stop it. Look, I don't want to argue about this...life is too short! Please read our spam policies. We're not here to promote a business....no matter what you may feel about other articles and their tone. The correct reaction when seeing spam-like material is to rewrite it or to remove it. Not to use it as a justification to add spam to an article you have a personal interest in. Thanks. RxS 15:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Spam warning
Please stop. If you continue spamming you will be blocked from editing. RxS 15:11, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Click-to-call


The article Click-to-call has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "It doesn't appear to meet WP:ORG / WP:GNG, or have a suitable WP:ATD. Has been in CAT:NN for 14 years, so hopefully we can now resolve it."

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 article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page 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. Boleyn (talk) 16:14, 10 February 2024 (UTC)

Nomination of Click-to-call for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Click-to-call 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/Click-to-call until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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 notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished. Boleyn (talk) 16:38, 16 February 2024 (UTC)