User talk:VikArrieta

File permission problem with File:Pablo Galuppo and Vik Arrieta, Monoblock founders.png
Thanks for uploading File:Pablo Galuppo and Vik Arrieta, Monoblock founders.png. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Eeekster (talk) 20:14, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

---Hi Eeekster, I added the tag OTRS pending. VikArrieta (talk) 02:45, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

May 2012
Hello VikArrieta. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Monoblock Industry of Imagineering, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. AllyD (talk) 20:55, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

--- Hi AllyD, article neutrality is sustained by the provided list of multiple independent, third-party reliable sources that describe the subject in detail, such as newspaper articles or critical reviews. The concept of "innovation" was use to its full meaning, not as empty peacock terms, but any fellow editor is welcome to replace it if there's in fact a more suitable word. I read the wiki of a project very similar to this (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poketo) to ensure I was contributing in a fair way. VikArrieta (talk) 02:41, 28 May 2012 (UTC)