User talk:Orgbio

Hello Orangemike, I can imagine the challenges of keeping spam off wikipedia. Unfortunately, the standard protocol you have applied has been applied incorrectly. 1. Promotion: my website is non-commercial and exists exclusively to understand organizations. 2. Represents a business or organization: none, this is my professional interest. 3. One person: that's me 4. Compensation: lol, my website costs me about $100CAD per annum. 5. Useful contributions: - I have spent the last 5 years thinking about internal controls and have compiled the most comprehensive list available. - As far as I can tell, it is relatively unique and as such contributes to the thought leadership on the subject matter. - I have done something similar with Risk Categories. 6. As a final note, I understand the need for the rigour applied with Wikipedia and the never ending battle against spam. However, I am one of the good guys. Content and research on my website is provide to the commons for general consumption. I have purposely avoided monetizing the site exactly so I have complete and absolute independence. Not everything on myorgbio.org is Wikipedia relevant - but some, such as the list of internal controls, is.

Finally as an example of my belief in the underlying principles of Wikipedia, I would encourage you to reach out to Leanne S. Development Associate with the foundation. I have been having ongoing conversations about bringing a charitable status for Wikipedia to Canada for the past 2-3 years. Once again, no self-promotion, just a belief in what has been built and accomplished by groups of volunteers.

My email is on my site, feel free to reach out via that method if you want further clarifications on any of the above.

April 2020
Hello, I'm Creffett. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Internal control have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. creffett (talk) 14:12, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions other than promoting your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  17:54, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Event to knowledge for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Event to knowledge 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/Event to knowledge 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. Slywriter (talk) 17:57, 30 March 2022 (UTC)