User talk:Zeng8r/Archives/2011/September

College Hunks
I posted a report at WP:COIN about them. The account involved appears to be a one-use one. It can be dealt with there. Later, and have fun! :) --Ebyabe (talk) 23:11, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks! As you might have noticed, he totally ignored my advice and went so far as to unilaterally remove the problem banners I'd added to the article. I cringe at getting involved in something like this these days; good to see you're on the case. Zeng8r (talk) 23:42, 20 September 2011 (UTC)


 * You're welcome! It's sad when newbies don't get the point. I know we're supposed to assume good faith, but not at the expense of common sense. If Chris isn't the president or CEO or otherwise connected with College Hunks, I'll be surprised. Admins can deal with it, that's why they're paid the big bucks (ha-ha). And conversely to you, I live to jump into this sort of thing. Cheers! --Ebyabe (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I have not ignored any advice. I have been working tirelessly to improve the article. I have been conferring with McGeddon about how to improve the article and have improved both the tone, content and cited sources in the article. I am not acting any way other than in good faith, however I am not at the same time content to leave tags that misrepresent the content when no case is being stated as to why any particular content is being raised into question. I also don't see the need for the condescending tone of the remarks. I have repeatedly asked for assistance in approving the article. As a matter of fact I am a field coach for the company and I happen to think the history and development of it is worthy of encyclopedic documentation, as did clearly the original creators and contributors to the article.

I have also asked for content to be pointed to that I could focus on improving and recruiting independent third party sources to contribute to. I may be a wikipedia newbie, but I am not unintelligent and I have in no way acted outside of good faith. I have not added content in an effort to be promotional, only in an effort to document the important aspects of the articles topic, which happens to be College Hunks Hauling Junk. I plan to contribute to many other areas of Wikipedia as well, I start here since the content had become dated and did not properly reflect the company about which the article is written.

Please consider the significant efforts I have made to request assistance and feedback as well as my disclosure as soon as I realized that was the appropriate method to take. I would much rather work with you than against you and I do not wish to use wikipedia promotionally, I only wish to ensure the credibility of the information posted about a company that is most certainly notable in the eyes of INC Magazine, Fortune Magazine, Entrepreneur Magazine, The Wall Street Journal, FOX, CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC and so on.

I look forward to your thoughtful reply. ChrisTheHunk (talk) 00:09, 21 September 2011 (UTC)


 * As clearly stated on this very talk page, I'm burned out by the wiki-nonsense and don't intend to get any more involved in this issue. I only stumbled upon your contributions because I was looking up some totally unrelated info and noticed that somebody had inserted the owners of a junk hauling business into the "notable residents" section of the Tampa, Florida article. After all the notices and advice you'd already received, how could you think that was a good idea? And it didn't take much further sniffing around to discover that you've been inserting links to your company's web page into a bunch of totally inappropriate articles all over wikipedia AND have repeatedly removed banners designed to call editors' attention to an article in need of repair. Looks really bad, imo.


 * Anyway, due to the fact that you seem to be a single-purpose account with unfortunate editing tendencies, an investigation has been requested at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Good luck with all that. Zeng8r (talk) 00:30, 21 September 2011 (UTC)