User talk:Seanwolfington

Conflict of Interest
Please review Conflict of interest before editing any more articles. CovenantD 09:00, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

(from User talk:Quarl) Hi, my name is Sean Wolfington and i am new to Wikipedia. When i found that i had a page on the site i added truthful facts from my bio with out the intent of creating a "vanity" article. I did add content to other people's articles that linked to a film we made and now i know that is not allowed - i am sorry. I just read the "spamming" link you added to my page and now i realize that what i did was not right.

This excerpt explains what happened to me: "Some people spam Wikipedia without meaning to. That is, they do things which Wikipedians consider to be spamming, without realizing that their actions are not in line with building an encyclopedia. A new editor who owns a business may see that there are articles about other businesses on Wikipedia, and conclude that it would be appropriate to create his own such article. A Web site operator may see many places in Wikipedia where his or her site would be relevant, and quickly add several dozen links to it."

If you can i would appreciate your advise on what to do to avoid creating problems in the future. Thanks. Sean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.18.54.173 (talk • contribs)
 * Hi Sean, thanks for apologizing for spamming. In the future, it is better to let other people write about you to avoid conflicts of interest.  In the meantime you can try editing some random articles to get the hang of Wikipedia. —Quarl (talk) 2006-12-18 01:59Z 



Your note
Hey Sean, thanks for the note! I'm really glad you contacted me, since I'm glad to get the chance to explain some. Sorry if you got jumped on. People that edit heavily in AFD or reverting spam or vandalism see so many bad faith edits that we forget sometimes that some are in good faith like yours, so that may be why folks jumped to conclusions.

As for advice about how to avoid the situation, I'm glad you familiarized yourself with the relevant policies, that's probably the best thing to do. Did you read the introduction and whatnot?

I'd also suggest that if an edit seems to you to have a chance of being perceived as spam (which you now have a better idea of what's likely to be!), you should discuss it on the article's talk page before putting it in. (e.g. "I'd like to add this website, but since I'm involved in it, I'm concerned about WP:COI. Does anyone else want to add it?"  If an unrelated person adds it or if people come to consensus that it's ok to add, you're good.  If no one responds to your post, you could take it to someone's talk page (like mine!) or discuss it in #wikipedia on freenode if you have IRC.  Or, if no one responds for a week or something, and you see that someone's been editing the page (e.g. they've probably seen the post) you can probably assume that it's ok.  I'd put another note on the talk page saying something like, "well, no one responded for a week, so i figured it was ok, if you don't think so then revert me and accept my appologies."  Also, always leave a nice, detailed edit summary, so folks know what you're doing.  No one's going to assume you're a spammer if you communicate clearly about what you're doing. If you want more help, you can put Adoptme on this page, and someone will adopt you. Let me know on my talk page if you have any questions or want to discuss anything. Thanks for editing! Peace, delldot | talk 15:21, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

The article
Well, I had a look at Articles for deletion/Sean Wolfington, and it looks like it was posted on the 16th, so the debate will probably "close" today, and the consensus decides what to do. The best thing you can do to help your article (aside from getting familiar with WP:BIO and the deletion policies, which you probably already have to some extent) is to add reliable sources to the article. The sources have to be non-trivial in nature (e.g. you're not just mentioned in passing, and it's about something significant rather than just "well we interviewed this guy on the street..." Reliable sources are things like books, journals, respected news sources, stuff that's generally looked at as trustworthy.  Stuff that doesn't count is like blogs, random people's websites, newsletters, that type of thing.  THe more reliable sources you have asserting your notability, the stronger of a case you have.  You might want to suggest to others to insert the sources if you thnk there might be a chance that people will think you're spamming or there's a WP:COI problem.  You can ask me to insert them and if I deem them good I will.  Many wikipedians consider verifiability and notability to be the same thing: i.e. if multiple trustworthy publications have written about you, you're automatically notable. It seems like if you're a film producer of well-known films, that would qualify. If the article does get deleted and you've become familiar enough with policy to feel that you have a case for it being notable, you can bring it up at WP:DRV. A problem, though, is WP:COI: the fact that the article is about you is problematic, since you're hardly a neutral source. So it's good to discuss things with others (like me).

Another really important thing to do is make sure the article asserts your notability well (without exaggerating or breaking WP:NPOV, of course). After that first sentence, I'd add (or get someone to add) what you've done that makes you notable, and why it makes you notable. If you produced a film, how big of a splash did it make? That kind of thing.

In the end though, there's only so much you can do. Since we don't have unlimited servers, there has to be a cutoff at which they decide people don't get to be included. If that's decided, I hope you don't take it personally! It's not a statement about you, just the limits of the encyclopedia. But hopefully that won't come up :) Definitely let me know if I can help with anything or whatnot.  Peace, delldot | talk 19:53, 21 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Oh, one more thing: If the final decision is to delete but you want your work to be lost, you can request that the article be "userfied" i.e. moved from the main article space to your own user page.  You can request this in the AFD.   Peace, delldot | talk 20:41, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

article
Sure, I definitely suggest getting more sources and cleaning up the article still. If not for its own sake, to make your case stronger if someone nominates it for deletion again, which is a possibility. With the articles, the best thing to do would be post the links to them on the article's talk page and leave me a note when you have. That way I can look at them as can the rest of the community to determine whether they should be included. If there aren't links, maybe you can cut and paste them if they're short, being sure to note that you're quoting and reference where the quote's from. I'm pretty sure that's not against any copyright laws (you can say I said to if someone objects!)

About the advert thing, I'd go through the article and make sure everything conforms to WP:NPOV, in terms of wording and everything. I'd use specific, cited facts whenever possible, eg a number of dollars rather than "billions of dollars", stuff like that. If you go through and clean up what you can and believe you've gotten it so it doesn't read like an ad anymore, put a note on the talk page to start a discussion about taking the template down. It might also help to put a note asking for advice on how to NPOV the article before discussing taking it down; maybe someone has something specific in mind. Of course when you're editing the article you want to use very specific edit summaries and discuss any edits that might be controversial on the talk page per WP:COI.

By the way, you should sign your posts on talk pages using ~, which automatically puts your signature and a time stamp on the post.

Keep in touch! Peace, delldot | talk 03:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)


 * The citations you suggested looked good, so I put some of them in the article. Sure, if you have more go ahead and put them in or suggest them on the talk page, the more the merrier, right?  I'd especially suggest finding refs for the factual statements that are uncited in the article, e.g. the sale of the company, the number of $ made, etc.  Also, if you have a picture of yourself that you took or that you hold the copyright to, you might want to upload it for the article.  (You'd have to release it into the GFDL though, meaning pretty much anyone can use it for any purpose and you wouldn't control the copyright anymore).  While I was adding the refs I did a little style editing, and I left some hidden notes in the article, which you can see in the edit window with suggestions for things I thought might improve the article.


 * I was touched by your invitation to a screening, I don't know if I'd be able to get away from everything here to make it, but it certainly sounds exciting. I notice from the article that you're in south Florida and you work on poverty issues?  I'm in Sarasota, and I do housing and homeless advocacy, what a cooincidence, huh?  If you're ever in the area, you should stop by our Food Not Bombs meal, we serve a free meal in a public park every Friday, it's a lot of fun.  Anyway, stay in touch, delldot | talk 06:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I was about to hit save page when I saw your other note. Deleting the info is fine by me, though I don't think it would be a problem to politicize the article so long as it's phrased in a WP:NPOV manner; we have plenty of articles about political stuff.  You may want to leave the ref in the "External links" section to support notability, but either way is fine.  Remember to leave good edit summaries and notes on the talk page, especially when editing the page about yourself.  Well, I'm going to bed but if you leave me another note I'll see it and respond tomorrow.  Peace, delldot | talk 06:00, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Latest refs
Hey again, I used the ADP ref for the company buying section, but didn't add in the Bella reviews. My reasoning was, they only mentioned you in passing or not at all, so they'd be good for the Bella (film) article, but not the Sean Wolfington article (unless they're there to reference a specific statement in it). Also, I think one of the links is broken, it doesn't mention Bella as far as I can see: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,214255,00.html

For further refs suggestions, you can use the article's talk page so more members of the community can have input if they want.

Also, don't forget to use those edit summaries, especially when working on your own article. Some would object to you editing it at all per WP:COI so you want to be as defensible as possible.

The article is looking good! Talk to you soon, peace, delldot | talk 16:02, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Comment
I've put your uploaded picture in the infobox for the Sean Wolfington article, but the infobox still needs important things added to it: year of birth and place of birth. Plus a caption for the picture as well could be added, but I don't think it has to be. If you have problems adding them, let me know and I'll add it for you. RobJ1981 18:41, 26 December 2006 (UTC)
 * To update caption: from the top of the article, click on the "edit this page" tab, and the infobox will be at the top. It's listed as caption, then just put the words for the picture after the "caption =" part of the infobox. The same applies for the rest of the empty parts of the infobox as well. Thanks for the invite to the movie. Unless there is a showing in southern Wisconsin, travel isn't possible right now. RobJ1981 20:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you
Hi Essjay. My name is Sean Wolfington and i wanted to thank you for resolving the issue with the article about me. There is still an old notice on the article that say's "This article or section reads like an advertisement". It appears to me that this was the original note added to the article. I have edited to the article to remove the reviews of the movie i made per the suggestion of another editor and i thought this notice would go away. Can i get your advice on how to proceed? Thanks again for resolving the other issue. Have a great holiday. ps: i noticed there was a request for a photo to be uploaded so i uploaded a photo. however, i do not know how to link it to the article. Do you know how to do this? Here is a link to the photo in case that helps: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sean_Wolfington_picture.jpg#filelinks


 * All I really did was close the AFD; the discussion hadn't reached a decision within the timeframe, so it was closed and the article kept by default. My suggestion would be to discuss removing the tag on the talk page; if nobody objects, then you can do so (give it a few days for discussion), and if they do, you can work together to correct whatever is wrong. As for adding the image, you can do so by adding the code  [[Image:Sean Wolfington picture.jpg]]  to the article; I'd suggest aligning it, scaling it down, and adding a caption, which would be code like this:  [[Image:Sean Wolfington picture.jpg|thumb|150px|right|Text of the catption here.]]  which will produce what you see at the right. (The code reads as "insert this image, make it a thumbnail, scale it down to 150px size, align it to the right, and add this text as a caption.") If you need other help, let me know! Essjay   ( Talk )  02:02, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Hey
Hi. It is Sean Wolfington. I wanted to ask you for your help regarding the page for the movie i made, Bella(film), There has been a sign on the page for a while saying that the article is like a press release. I did not start this article, nor did anyone involved in making the movie - i did add links to articles from legitamate sources like the Hollywood Reporter, ABC, FOX etc... Is it possible to remove this banner? Thank you again for all your help. By the way, the director of our film was honored by the Dept of Immigration at the White house for being a postive role model as an imigrant who became a US citizen. he was also invited by the first lady to attend the state of the union address as a result. There are a number of articles written about the award and the state of the union. For example, here is a USA TODAY article: http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-01-23-sotu-guests_x.htm?csp=34 and here is a NY Times article: http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2007/01/23/washington/24scene_graphic.html If you look at the graphic, he is number 12. I think it would be something good to add but i want to do it correctly. The stories have been published in many places. Do you have any suggestions? Thanks 76.18.54.173 07:58, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
 * Hey again Sean! About the press release banner, I'd suggest discussing it on the talk page.  You can discuss what the person's reasons were for putting them up and what would have to happen for them to be willing to have it come down.  Then you can suggest rewrites and most likely people will just cut and paste your suggestions (assuming they meet WP:NPOV, and so on). If leaving a note on the talk page doesn't get a response within a day or two, you can also look in the page history to figure out who put it up, and leave them a note on their talk page directing them to the discussion on the talk:Bella (film) and requesting comment.  I feel like in previous discussions I may not have been clear enough about how much WP:COI discourages people from editing articles in which they have a conflict of interest; it strongly encourages people to leave notes on the talk page instead.  The award that you mentioned sounds like a good addition to the article, I'm sure folks on the talk page will agree.  If no one has dealt with it in a couple days, let me know and I can have a look at it.  Same for the advert banner (though I usually don't take maintenance templates down myself without discussing it first on the talk page, either).  I'd suggest finding as many good sources you can about the award and putting them on the talk page.  That way other editors can verify it and put the best ones (e.g. the most reliable ones, the most complete...) in the article.  Let me know how it goes.  Peace, delldot | talk 14:14, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Bella
Hi Sean. For both pages, I suggest proposing specific changes on the talk page. If people support the changes, you can make them. If no one says anything, you can contact me again in a few days or a week and I can review them. Do you understand why people think bella (film) reads like a movie promo? It looks to me like it may not adhere to WP:NPOV. Wikipedia articles should all simply report on their subject, rather than make commentary about it (e.g. "heartwarming"). I can explain more if you have more specific questions. I also left a list of suggestions on Talk:Sean Wolfington, it would be helpful if you could review them and make suggestions for wording changes (e.g. if you can find a source stating how much money the company made, rather than stating around $400 million, etc.). It looks as though someone may nominate [{Sean Wolfington]] for deletion again unless verifiable sources can be found for the info that asserts notability (e.g. how much money the company made). You can see the talk page for that info. About Bella, do you own the copyright to the wording used in the article, and did you give permission for that wording to be used under the GFDL (i.e. anyone can use it for any reason)? If not, we'll have to take that wording off and rewrite it in our own words (which we'll probably have to do anyway for NPOV reasons). I'll try to have a look at bella in the next couple days and leave suggestions on the talk page. Let me know what you need. Peace, delldot | talk 07:31, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Reply
There is a discussion going on about the advertising here: Talk:Sean Wolfington. As a small note: remember to post on the user talk page when asking questions, not the user page itself. I hope this helped. RobJ1981 13:41, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

RE: Sean Wolfington -Please help
Essjay, I just noticed that the article about me was tagged with an advert banner again. Would you mind viewing the page to help me? Thank you Essjay. Seanwolfington 03:52, 4 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Hi Sean: I've left a note on the talk page of your article with a few suggestions; specifically, I've suggested that they draft up a list of things they would like to see sources for and any other questions they have for you. In general, we try to be very careful about having verifiable third-party sources for any information included here, so they are concerned that some of the information doesn't have any sources to back it up. If you'll give them a day or two to draft that up, then provide sources for anything that needs them (remembering that online sources, especially news agencies and the like are usually best), everything should be fine. If you have any questions for me, please don't hesitate to ask. (I'm copying this to your talk page so you'll see it sooner; if you have further need of me, please let me know on my talk page.) Essjay   ( Talk )  07:20, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

(from User talk:Quarl) Hi. I wanted to ask you for your help with the page written about me. After i was notified that i should not have added links to reviews on the film i made i deleted them and other editors adjusted the page according to the input given. As a result the request to delete the page written about me was deleted. Recently someone added an advertising banner but i don't understand why. All of the information that was referenced on the page was adjusted by editors and the info is from credible 3rd party sources. Can you advize me on what you think i should do? Thank you for your previous input also. Thanks.Seanwolfington 04:02, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
 * Hi Seanwolfington, thanks for writing. I think the discussion going on at Talk:Sean Wolfington is quite healthy, with specific suggestions from User:delldot, and I believe the parties already involved can peacefully resolve the matter of the advertising tag.  Cheers :) —Quarl (talk) 2007-02-08 08:07Z 

Thanks
Excellent responses at Talk:Sean Wolfington. I left you a short response, and I'll work on incorporating some of the info tomorrow or otherwise soon, and I'll probably have more questions, etc then. Thanks for putting in the work to get that info! Peace, delldot | talk 05:54, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

The errors
OK, I'll correct them as soon as I get a chance. Sorry, I think I made those errors because I didn't understand your responses on the talk page. I'm about to go to work, so I'll either do it when I get home or illicitly from work! delldot | talk 14:50, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * OK, I've had a hack at them, let me know what you think. By the way, if you want to say what date the film will be released (if you know), it currently says it "will be released in 2007", which sounds a little weird.  Also, a random suggestion: you might want to link to the article from User:Seanwolfington. (plus that would get rid of that nasty red link!)  That's nice of you to invite me to the screening, but I'm afraid I have my hands full here.  Anyway, let me know what you think of the changes and if I missed anything. Peace, delldot | talk 16:23, 21 February 2007 (UTC)


 * Sure, I can do that. I appreciate your patience!  I mean, it must be annoying to be the world's definitive expert on subject yet not be able to edit the article on it!  We may want to change the wording on that; it sounds a little awkward the way you suggested it, but I can't think of any other way to word it.  What about 'Wolfington's company...'? Talk to you soon, delldot | talk 19:57, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Refs
Hey Sean, I added the autosuccess ref to Sean Wolfington. Hopefully I added it in the right place.

I don't think a press release is appropriate as a source, since you can say anything in a press release, it's not fact checked. However, it would be fine to link to any news articles or other publications that wrote something about it, perhaps using the press release. Have links to any of those?

D'oh! Not sure how I missed the mention in the Fox news thing. I'll add it back. delldot  talk  23:02, 6 March 2007 (UTC)


 * Update: Somebody else must have added the Fox News link back in, or maybe I never removed it. It's ref # 4.  Peace,  delldot   talk  23:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hi again
Hey Sean. Do you have an independent source for that? As you know, I'm a stickler for sourcing facts, especially those that could be seen as non-neutral. I don't think the movie's site itself is a good source because it's not independent of the subject. If there's no one source that lists the awards, we can use many sources. If the awards haven't been written about, they probably don't count as notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. We could say something like "it's won a number of awards, including the notable this and that. " Peace, delldot   talk  07:20, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Re: Hi
I made the changes to Alejandro Gomez Monteverde and Eduardo Verástegui along with some copy editing.

I couldn't find the article at this link: http://www.zenit.org/english/ can you direct me to the article itself?

What I was saying about the awards is that I don't want to add anything in that hasn't been mentioned in an independent source. Any awards for which you can find articles that mention the movie getting them, I'd be fine with adding. If you want me to use articles linked to in the Self Medicated site, can you point me to the links themselves? The best would be if you could provide full citations with author's name, date, title, name of publication, and link. The less work I have to do, the merrier ;)

From now on, how about you suggest changes to articles on the talk pages of the articles themselves. This will allow more editors to be involved in the discussion. If the changes don't get reviewed within a couple days or a week, leave me a message and I'll get to them.

Thanks very much for the invitation but I'm very busy here with work and all :( Peace,  delldot   talk  00:03, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

New page
Hi Sean, a few suggestions. First, please carefully reread WP:COI to make sure you're OK to write the article. If you're not, request it instead at WP:RA. If you are, I would recommend working on it in your user space (i.e. any page beginning with User:Seanwolfington/... such as User:Seanwolfington/article). That way when you have it so you to move it to the article space (i.e. the mainspace, pages with no prefix) you can have someone (e.g. me) look it over to make sure it meets WP policies and guidelines. Also, the two internet articles are a great start but I'd make sure you have more sources before you move it to the mainspace so you won't have any trouble with notability or verifiability. Similarly, each statement should be attributable, and, of course, neutral. For writing the article itself, I'd recommend having a look at Your first article and How to write a great article. You can of course come to me with any specific questions. Peace, delldot   talk  17:27, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Image:Final_Bella_Poster.pdf listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Final_Bella_Poster.pdf, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nv8200p talk 00:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Image:Final_Bella_Poster_-_low_res.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Final_Bella_Poster_-_low_res.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Nv8200p talk 03:12, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Image:Eduardo_Modeling.jpg listed for deletion
An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, Image:Eduardo_Modeling.jpg, has been listed at Images and media for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Kelly hi! 01:09, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Image copyright problem with Image:Official Bella Poster - Eduardo & Tammy.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Official Bella Poster - Eduardo & Tammy.jpg. You've indicated that the image is being used under a claim of fair use, but you have not provided an adequate explanation for why it meets Wikipedia's requirements for such images. In particular, for each page the image is used on, the image must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Can you please check


 * That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for each article the image is used in.
 * That every article it is used on is linked to from its description page.

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. --FairuseBot (talk) 10:12, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Sean Wolfington
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Sean Wolfington. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Sean Wolfington (2nd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)


 * In response to your message I give you the occasion, to work on that article on a userfied version of it so you can make the necessary additions/changes/fixes, etc. \After that you can send it to WP:DRV or ask any admin about the improvements made and whether it is good enough to be back as an article. Now, if you have not have received significant coverage from third-party sources or don't meet any criteria at WP:N, it is unlikely that it would be article worthy and also it would have to avoid any conflict of interest.


 * Reply me, if you want a copy of the deleted article. Note, I won't be available Saturday and much of Sunday this weekend and I work all week long (which also explains the lengthy delay), so if you are viewing this message tomorrow and want a copy you might want to ask another admin or wait till late Sunday or during the week between 3 and 6 PM Eastern Time. -- JForget 22:28, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Never mind here's the copy at User:Seanwolfington/Sean Wolfington. So it is ready to be updated. -- JForget 22:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)


 * As observations, it doesn't seem to have a lot of coverage from reliable third-party sources which is a bit of problem as it is a major notability criteria. Second of all, the magazine you are referring too doesn't seem to have a Wikipedia article, thus the magazine failing notability guidelines so then the award won isn't considered notable per guidelines. Being nominated for a notable award multiple awards also doesn't apply also to your case either. So it would be quite difficult for you to meet WP:N as of now. JForget  02:07, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. --SineBot (talk) 17:19, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Noteworthyness isn't the problem
In response to your request for assistance, I have to tell you that your potential notability is a secondary concern compared to the fact that you wrote your own article which is a major conflict of interest and frowned upon on WP. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 02:04, 25 November 2009 (UTC)


 * Then your best bet is to visit Biographies of living persons, which is the project that deals with articles about living people. Although I would suggest to you that any lobbying against deletion you do on your own article's behalf will be counter-productive because of the impression of conflict-of-interest that it will give other Wikipedians.  What will be appreciated is helping other Wikipedians to find reliable sources that have mentioned you. --Kevlar (talk • contribs) 21:52, 30 November 2009 (UTC)

File:Edaurdo at Bella private screening.JPG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Edaurdo at Bella private screening.JPG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. Kelly hi! 22:28, 11 September 2015 (UTC)