User talk:Rampage45

Welcome!
Hello, Rampage45, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

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).

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to 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)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Yngvadottir (talk) 18:57, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi Rampage45, thanks for signing up and for your work so far. I'm giving you the version of the welcome template that we give to editors who appear to have a conflict of interest, because you are using a lot of non-neutral terms in editing about Rich Riley. It's possible you are just unfamiliar with writing for an encyclopedia. Wikipedia aims for neutral presentation of the facts, so for example Yahoo! as a "major internet company" is too much, sounding like an ad rather than a context for the reader, and there's no need for anything except a bare statement of profession when adding Riley to a list of alumni. "Just the facts", please. Yngvadottir (talk) 18:57, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Rich Riley
Hi: I rewrote the article to be more neutral, chopping out the paragraph that was all about Shazam rather than Riley. (Note: always use the person's last name, not their first.) I've now also removed the photo. Commons is going to delete it; they only host completely copyright-free images, and that clearly doesn't apply in the case of a Bloomberg screenshot. It's also not acceptable as fair use on Wikipedia, because he's a living person, so it is possible to obtain a free image of him - by photographing him at a public event. (In addition to the "fair use" link in the previous sentence, you may want to look at the overall image use policy for Wikipedia.) I don't know what your connection to him is, but could you possibly take a photo of him yourself? It should depict him at an event, not posed in his office, because it would need to be your own work for you to release all rights to it; even for publicity shots, the photographer almost always retains copyright, so we avoid using anything that looks like a professional publicity shot. Yngvadottir (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)'

We have permission from Bloomberg and sent to Creative Commons

Signature
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:00, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
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. Thank you. Rayman60 (talk) 16:00, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Rayman, I removed all the source materials can you please let me know why you are redirecting to Shazam the service. I just wants to make it compliant by your and Wikipedia standards? I appreciate your help.

Help me!
I keep  getting edited by a person who says I have COI and all  i have done is remove advertising and put factual  sources. Can you help me, he stated a COI complaint. Rich Riley CEO of Shazam is the page. Please help me with...

Rampage45 (talk) 17:29, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

Having a Conflict of Interest isn't always related to your editing behavior. Please read the COI guidelines for more information. ThePlatypusofDoom (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

And also please follow the link to the noticeboard. MSJapan (talk) 23:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

I am having issues, I removed a redirect to Shazam which I believe was vandalism, I corrected source data and COI issues, and was redirected. I removed all the source materials can anyone please let me know why you are redirecting to Shazam the service. I just wants to make it compliant by your and Wikipedia standards? I appreciate your help.

ALSO I DID NOT REMOVE THE REDIRECT, to hopefully illustrate I am willing to do this the correct way. UPDATE: We did briefly remove for a third party to review.

Help me!
Please help me with...

Rampage45 (talk) 18:25, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

I am having issues, I removed a redirect to Shazam from Rich Riley's page which I believe was vandalism, I corrected source data and COI issues, and was redirected. I removed all the source materials can anyone please let me know why you are redirecting to Shazam the service. I just wants to make it compliant by your and Wikipedia standards? I appreciate your help.

ALSO I DID NOT REMOVE THE REDIRECT, to hopefully illustrate I am willing to do this the correct way. UPDATE: We did briefly remove for a third party to review.
 * The redirect was not intended as vandalism - according to 's edit summary, Rich Riley is only notable for one event. Check the page history. I would argue from a simple Google search that there does seem to be sufficient coverage to warrant an article, however please read WP:Edit warring - you've engaged in two reverts in the last 24 hours. I suggest that you talk to Rayman60 before editing it again.-- Laun  chba  ller  20:22, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
 * (EC) This is because he's not independently notable from his company to suggest having his own article. SwisterTwister   talk  20:23, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

ANSWER: I posted source material for many of his achievements from Power 100 two years in a row, and additional life event noted by third party sources, such as his work at Yahoo, so my confusion is with the fact you are saying he is notable for one event. PLEASE HELP, I HAVE NOT REMOVED THE REDIRECT.


 * You state three times that you have not removed the redirect, however your edit history shows you have done this twice, most latest yesterday evening shortly before claiming for the third time you hadn't. I'm not sure if you realise, but reverting the edit removes the redirect, and given the discussions, can be seen as a rather belligerent move (albeit one that leaves an obvious audit trail). Rayman60 (talk) 09:10, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Apologies for my poor clarity. I removed the redirect those times for a third party editor to see the page. Again I am not being belligerent and genuinely apologize for any confusion. How can I make the page compliant in your eyes in my only question? We supplied source material you requested, and edited advertorial text - can you please let me know what was erroneous, it's all third party sourced?

Help me!
Please help me with...

Rampage45 (talk) 14:45, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I cannot get Rayman60 to respond to this and he keeps putting a redirect up for Rich Riley saying he has no sources, then now he is notable for one event. Which source material contradicts. Please help: My note to him:

Apologies for my poor clarity. I removed the redirect those times for a third party editor to see the page. Again I am not being belligerent and genuinely apologize for any confusion. How can I make the page compliant in your eyes in my only question? We supplied source material you requested, and edited advertorial text - can you please let me know what was erroneous, it's all third party sourced?
 * Pinging . Post on their talkpage in the future, or use ping or u if you want to send them a message. —Hexafluoride Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk 16:37, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * It wasn't me that made the decision to re-direct. I merely referred the issue to the COI page after the long-standing issue with the nature of your edits and reverts. Another user did it based on a rule called WP:BLP1E. This came about from a discussion you were linked to, namely the COI discussion. The redirect was actioned by someone else, an editor of good standing, which you reverted and accused of being a vandal. Since then I have simply reverted your reversions, but if I didn't, someone else would've. I am not the person who decides notability, it is a consensus between independent editors. I suggest if you need further clarification on why Rich Riley was deemed not notable, you check the notability guidelines here Notability (people) to understand the rationale behind this. The issue was not really about sources, but about the fact that Rich Riley is not notable according to the criteria laid down that determines notability. In the meantime, I also would recommend not calling editors vandals without foundation or making any edits on the page now that affect the redirect without first having it agreed by consensus. A third party editor will most definitely be able to see what the article looked like at every stage of its history, including immediately before its redirect. I would also like you to address the fact that you have a clear COI - something that generally should prevent you from being involved in such an article. Several well established editors have commented on this but I think you either don't realise or are intentionally ignoring them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rayman60 (talk • contribs) 17:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for answering, I did not realize what was happening and was not ignoring you or other editors. I am just new at this just unaware of process. I am sorry I assumed it was vandalism, and meant no offense. I am requesting a third party editor to get the page compliant. I will also no longer edit it as well, to avoid any presumed COI.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rampage45 (talk • contribs) 20:26, 10 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The compliance issue (sources etc) is moot if the subject is deemed to not be notable. If they're not notable, they don't have an article. Often they get deleted, but in this case it was redirected to Shazam. By applying the guidelines of notability, it has been the consensus of a number of editors that the subject is not notable as they are only notable for their efforts with this company. Rayman60 (talk) 00:15, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. —Hexafluoride Ping me if you need help, or post on my talk 21:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Share your experience and feedback as a Wikimedian in this global survey
Hello! The Wikimedia Foundation is asking for your feedback in a survey. We want to know how well we are supporting your work on and off wiki, and how we can change or improve things in the future. The opinions you share will directly affect the current and future work of the Wikimedia Foundation. You have been randomly selected to take this survey as we would like to hear from your Wikimedia community. To say thank you for your time, we are giving away 20 Wikimedia T-shirts to randomly selected people who take the survey. The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes.

Take the survey now!

You can find more information about this project. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. Please visit our frequently asked questions page to find more information about this survey. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email to surveys@wikimedia.org.

Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 19:20, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your feedback matters: Final reminder to take the global Wikimedia survey
Hello! This is a final reminder that the Wikimedia Foundation survey will close on 28 February, 2017 (23:59 UTC). The survey is available in various languages and will take between 20 and 40 minutes. Take the survey now.

If you already took the survey - thank you! We won't bother you again.

About this survey: You can find more information about this project here or you can read the frequently asked questions. This survey is hosted by a third-party service and governed by this privacy statement. If you need additional help, or if you wish to opt-out of future communications about this survey, send an email through EmailUser function to User:EGalvez (WMF). About the Wikimedia Foundation: The Wikimedia Foundation supports you by working on the software and technology to keep the sites fast, secure, and accessible, as well as supports Wikimedia programs and initiatives to expand access and support free knowledge globally. Thank you! --EGalvez (WMF) (talk) 08:15, 23 February 2017 (UTC)