User talk:Tatwood

A tag has been placed on Dave Ludlow, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of the page and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Cquan (talk, AMA Desk) 20:18, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

You have been blocked for persistent posting of spam and inappropriate articles. Because I don't see any valid contributions from this account, the block is indefinite. Kafziel Talk 22:27, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

Really? What valuable contributions would you like to make? Kafziel Talk 19:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Valuable Contributions
Kafziel,

Thanks for getting back to me. As I said in my email, I'd like to make/ add to some contributions on topics such as design, photography, mountaineering, rock climbing etc. I was looking earlier and found an article on the Wasatch mountain range that needs some work done on it and would like to work on it if possible.

As for my first two contributions, what did I mess up on? The article on Dave Ludlow was a stub that somebody else had created. I just put some info on the page. The JetPaks page is one I created because I thought it was a noteworthy invention. I apologize if they were not appropriate, I really thought they were worthwhile articles for somebody researching those types of things. Out of curiosity, was it the topic itself that was considered spam, or the way the article was written. If it was the latter, I'll gladly fix it so that it's acceptable.

Thanks again for getting back to me.

Tatwood

Links to helpful pages
Here are some pages that will help answer any questions you may have about editing:
 * User tutorial
 * Help desk
 * Our most important policy - avoiding original research
 * Policy on maintaining a neutral point of view
 * Policy for content when editing articles and creating new ones
 * Notability guidelines for people
 * Tips for settling disputes
 * Guidelines for properly writing and formatting articles
 * Criteria for Good Articles
 * The Village Pump, our discussion forums

I hope these help. Kafziel Talk 20:13, 12 April 2007 (UTC)