User talk:Unsecretspy

Speedy deletion nomination of Rebate Financial Services
A tag has been placed on Rebate Financial Services, 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 that only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and 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 Rebate Financial Services 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 independent 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. Capitalismojo (talk) 01:55, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Copyright problems with Rebate Financial Services
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Rebate Financial Services, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). As a copyright violation, Rebate Financial Services appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Rebate Financial Services has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribute Share-Alike then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at and send an email with the message to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL) and CC-BY-SA, under CC-BY-SA, or released into the public domain leave a note at with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. Fire 55 (talk) 01:27, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

David Tweed
Hi Unsecretspy, if you could talk your concerns to the talk page of the David Tweed article, that would be great. - Tbsdy lives (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 13:32, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interests and disruption by socking
Your edits collectively have been to generally edit one article in a manner that suggests a close personal affiliation with the subject, which is something discouraged by our conflict on interests guidance. Further, it would appear that you're operating multiple (Simpleterms & SmoothWallsSam) single purpose accounts in a similarly disruptive manner, which is strictly forbidden by our policy on sockpuppetry. Can you explain why your edits between the three accounts, and why your connection with the article's subject is not something that should pose a continued concern to me? I await your response, and do note that failure to address these concerns may result in the opening of a investigation that may lead to blocking. NJA (t/ c)  09:13, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry case
You have been accused of sockpuppetry. Please refer to Sockpuppet investigations/Unsecretspy for evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with notes for the suspect before editing the evidence page. NJA (t/ c)  13:31, 15 January 2010 (UTC)