User talk:Sammymaudlin

Rock Town Hall
A tag has been placed on Rock Town Hall, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because it is an article about a certain web site, blog, forum, or other community of web users that does not assert the importance or significance of that web location. Please read our criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 7 under Articles, as well as notability guidelines for websites. Please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources which verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material, please affix the template  to the page, and put a note on Talk:Rock Town Hall. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. MKoltnow 04:20, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:Frontpagerth.jpg)
Thanks for uploading Image:Frontpagerth.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. User:Gay Cdn (talk) (Contr) 02:04, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

February 2009
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. The Real Libs-speak politely 17:28, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy because your account is being used only for spam, advertising, or promotion. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text below.

Copy of e-mail
Hi Sammy,

Unfortunately, what you have been doing is spamming. We don't allow blog sites because a) They're generally not trustworthy sources and b) Too subjective.

Whilst I commend you on your blog's values; having traffic and, in your opinion, a "labour of love" website does not necessarily make your blog notable. I will leave some links below this post detailing what can be on Wikipedia and what cannot.

In regards to "We accept advertising to help defray the cost(s)...": Wikipedia does not allow advertising whatsoever. Advertising would corrupt Wikipedia immensely and make it biased. As for Pitchfork: It's not a blog, it's a publication and it's very notable because of the sources that reference it. Whilst you may say that your discussion blog is just as popular; can you prove it with reliable, third party sources (i.e. a newspaper article)?

Another issue I have is conflict of interest. You are directly related to that blog site, and, as such, you have a conflict of interest. Having a COI can adversely effect your ability to remain neutral; whether subconsciously or not, it can really mess with Wikipedia's goals of having a neutral, reliable, and trustworthy encyclopaedia. Do you understand and empathise where I'm coming from, friend?

Here's some links you may find useful:


 * Advice on staying neutral.
 * An essay on why you can't advertise on Wikipedia
 * Self-explanatory
 * Conflict of Interest policy
 * The basis of Wikipedia; sourcing.

Yeah, I know that's a lot of reading but we've all gotta start somewhere.

In summary: To have a Wikipedia article for your blog you need a) Reliable, published, third party sources and b) To have it made by someone who isn't directly and/or indirectly related to any part (or in whole) of your organisation. If you wish to request to have your article made please see: AfC - on that page just follow the instructions (they might be a bit complex; e-mail me if you have any difficulty) and another user will check to see if it's notable or not. That's it.

I know Wikipedia may seem complex (and, seriously, it's like an incredibly bureaucratic behemoth) and unfair, but we have to do this to keep it free, trustworthy, and clean. My apologies if any of the above seems harsh, but that's Internet life I guess :)

I will unblock your account (or you may create a new one if you wish if you tell me what username you'll use) if you promise not to reference anything to your blogsite or any other site that you are directly involved with.

Thanks for taking the time to e-mail me and I hope this isn't too long for you!

Regards and take care,

Pat ( Scarian Call me Pat!  19:44, 20 February 2009 (UTC))