User talk:Mean as custard

This is my talk page. Please append all accolades, brickbats and threats to the bottom of the page.

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

I am unclear at why you feel the Idaho State University page looks like an advertisement. I listed only notable accomplishment that we are proud of and want to share with people. Could you please clear this up for me?

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Haywardke (talk • contribs) 20:50, 30 December 2013 (UTC) 

Wikipedia is not for things that you are proud of, it aims for a balanced, unbiased view, covering good and bad features in the same neutral tone, not the upbeat, promotional tone that this article seems to have. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:41, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

---

It's unclear to me why you keep editing the Virginia Organizing page to a five-year-old version with an old name (VOP) and out-of-date information. You are deleting updated information and relevant history. I have gone through and re-edited the page so that it is less promotional and more informational. Rather than delete everything I add, could you please make suggestions on ways to make it better? - Wiki user 843 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wiki user 843 (talk • contribs) 19:40, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Old talk moved to User talk:Mean as custard/Archive 1, User talk:Mean as custard/Archive 2, User talk:Mean as custard/Archive 3, User talk:Mean as custard/Archive 4

---

Hello Mean, may i know why did you delete my link. and if there is no reason will you please revert it. Thank you.

Which one ? . .

Mean as custard (talk) 15:27, 2 November 2013 (UTC) Vaibhav Indian (talk) 17:14, 2 November 2013 (UTC) for ur kind info i like custard.. what is ur problem miss why are you after deleting my contents, i am talking about the page Statue of Equality which you are trying to delete.

Not trying to delete it, just being bold and editing it, removing irrelevant content. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:47, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

can i ask why did you delete Constitution of India from Social equality page as it is relevant and constitution of India has a key point as Equality,..Vaibhav Indian (talk) 03:36, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+-+

Hi Mean as custard,

Thank you very much for your help. Are there some kind of guidelines or template for how a non-profit should set up its Wiki page? I'm having trouble understanding how the articles we have cited so far do not meet the criteria for encyclopedic.

Thanks, Global Community Monitor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Global community monitor (talk • contribs) 15:01, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

User:Cvbngd/sandbox

Hello Mean as Custard. At this page, you reverted at least 13x today, if I count correctly. It is a sandbox in user space, which means that the page is intended for tests. Why do you think the page is harmful for Wikipedia? --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 15:01, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a free web host for files unconnected with the project. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:11, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

Maybe it is connected with the project. It is possible that the editor learns to work with the wikicode. Why not WP:AGF or to ask or to take it to WP:MFD and explain your concerns properly instead of stubborn reverting? --Vejvančický (talk / contribs) 15:50, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

I have previously MFD'd identical files created by sockpuppets of this user. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:54, 4 March 2013 (UTC)

FYI re Henley Business School, South Africa

Just letting you know that I've initiated a SPI, it's pretty obvious to me that the three Soapboxers are singing the same tune - See WP:Sockpuppet investigations/Garthswest. Perhaps you'd like to comment there. Roger (talk) 10:52, 11 March 2013 (UTC)

I have tried to add the National Association of the Remodeling Industry's certification to the Professional Certification page but you keep removiing them. What am I doing wrong? The assocaiton has been granting certifications for over 25 years and is working with ANSI to become accredited. How can I create a post that will be accepted.

Dantad69 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dantad69 (talk • contribs) 19:19, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I have tried to add the National Association of the Remodeling Industry's certifications to the Professional Certification page but you keep removing them. What am I doing wrong? The assocaiton has been granting certifications for over 25 years and is working with ANSI to become accredited. How can I create a post that will be accepted. Dantad69 (talk) 19:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

I felt that it added nothing to the article; it is not meant to be an exhaustive list, and there are already plenty of examples. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:23, 18 March 2013 (UTC)

Reverting Changes on the Meta Golding page

Hello Mean as Custard. Could you please explain what is the problem you have with the lack of presence of a very personal detail, such as the birth date, considering we are talking about a living person? You keep reverting my changes. Sidis405 (talk) 10:56, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Birth date is not a personal detail, it is a matter of public record. Why do you insist on removing it? . . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:30, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Because the subject of the page deems it as too private. Anyhow this is about a living person http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Biographies_of_living_persons , "Exercise caution in using primary sources. Do not use trial transcripts and other court records, or other public documents, to support assertions about a living person. Do not use public records that include personal details, such as date of birth, home value, traffic citations, vehicle registrations, and home or business addresses.". Wouldn't this make sense? Sidis405 (talk) 11:49, 19 March 2013 (UTC)

Spam

Hi, I've also reverted the continual addition of this gopher website address from grant-writing-related articles. Seems to be just about all this editor adds. Tony (talk) 13:49, 24 March 2013 (UTC)

Richmond Christian School

Hello. I noticed you removed the school mission statement cited directly from the webpage, suggesting it was promotional. I feel it much better explains the tone of the school than what was there prior. Finally, you also removed the the link to the current school webpage where are the reference sources come from. A write up without accurate or up do date references is not useful. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 184.65.100.18 (talk) 21:15, 28 March 2013 (UTC)

Saint Mary-of-the-Woods Colllege page edits

I'm trying to understand why all my edits for the Saint Mary-of-the-Woods College page are being taken down. The current page is filled with outdated inaccurate information, and I'm trying to provide current information that is not only accurate, but more interesting. I am still learning about how to properly cite, and I don't even know how to upload a photo yet. Also, I'm trying to make sure the College is also listed appropriately on other sites that pertain to the college.

What do you want me to do differently?

francesdyerFrancesdyer (talk) 14:48, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

The main problem is with the uncited puffery like "The College’s success in online education comes from having a brick and mortar institution to add credibility to the distance program"; "Pomeroy Pride means surpassing your own expectations."; "The Saint Mary-of-the-Woods College Ring is an enduring symbol that binds proud traditions to the individual student’s memorable educational experience." Wikipedia articles are supposed to contain unbiased encyclopedic information (preferably sourced from reliable third-party publications), not serve as an extension of the college prospectus. Mean as custard (talk) 14:58, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

So, can none of the references come from the college website at all?

francesdyerFrancesdyer (talk) 17:55, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

If it is factual content which can't be disputed, then it should be ok to take it from the website. But not if it could be considered at all promotional. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:04, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you Mean as Custard for your explanation. I will use the sandbox for my draft edits before placing them on the site. francesdyerFrancesdyer (talk) 12:00, 4 April 2013 (UTC)

Global Telecom & Technology

Back in February 2012 you PRODded this, and it was deleted. Undeletion has been requested at WP:REFUND by an IP who claims that a purchase since then makes it notable, so per WP:DEL#Proposed deletion I have restored it, and now notify you in case you wish to consider AfD. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:27, 3 April 2013 (UTC)

Your revertion of my edits

I was surprised to find my recent changes to the PA Consulting page were all reverted so suddenly. I was following the Wikipedia guidelines as far as I understood, had posted the intended changes on the talk page with plenty of notice. I would have been happy to take into account any feedback on there before making the updates.

My intention had been to improve the article by updating out of date and inaccurate information, restructuring to a more factual layout, focusing on what PA as a company is/does, amending the language to make it more objective and adding more references. I accept that some of the language could still be seen as promotional but much of this was already live and I have tried not to add any additional promotional terms.

In the spirit of Wikipedia I’d welcome any specific suggestions on how to make the page as accurate and objective as possible so I can address them in the next update. --AChatburnPA (talk) 16:27, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

"PA helps businesses to succeed by identifying new opportunities offered by the wealth of ‘information intelligence’ and big data available to them, connecting it together with the help of technologies such as mobile, social media, geospatial and cloud, and commercialising it in a way that makes sense to the industry they are in, for example, energy and telecommunications" - this kind of language combines advertising, puffery, peacockery and business buzzwords; it certainly does not belong in an encyclopedia article. See WP:Spam and WP:COI. . Mean as custard (talk) 16:43, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) That article is a complete mess and has a long history of COI editing. I've trimmed down some more of the non-neutral content. I'd advise AChatburnPA to read and follow WP:BESTCOI if they want to make any changes to the article - in a nutshell - use secondary sources such as newspapers and suggest changes on the talk page. WP:MFA and WP:42 may also be helpful. SmartSE (talk) 17:23, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Point-of-Rental Systems

Hello,

On April 16th, you deleted all of the links (Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn and Blog) from the article. What is the issue with having these links when MANY other pages, such as Volvo Rents, has similar links listed as well? NASA1983 (talk) 16:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I am following the guidance on Wikipedia:External links. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:23, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey Mr. Mean

Hey, I noticed that you changed my edit on the ISKL (International School of Kuala Lumpur) Wikipedia Page. Why? All it says is "(revert to less blatantly promotional version)". I edited this page as I went to the school and know quite a bit about it. I was there for 5 years. I know how the school works. I was just wondering why you would take all my work down? Was it because my work was bad? Was it false? All I'm asking is for a more justified reason than what I have gotten. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Almondmuncher (talk • contribs) 19:37, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Like I said, it was blatantly promotional - stuff like: "At ISKL, learning does not stop with academics but encompasses social, emotional and moral development. We offer a well-rounded educational program for our students to excel and lead balanced quality lives outside of the classroom.". . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:24, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to CSBS College may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:54, 13 May 2013 (UTC)

---

Thank you for your assistance and input on the Guilford College page. I made brief comments on the "edit summary" in history. You help make other wiki folks better with your feedback. True and unbiased integrity of information is the goal. I will continue to think about how I can make the article better. With appreciation, wikiwiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikiwiki80 (talk • contribs) 23:30, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Julian Stair may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 09:31, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	Appreciation for your hard work throughout Wikipedia. See my brief message on the bottom of your User talk page and on Guilford College History (edit summary). Wikiwiki80 (talk) 23:33, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Nrusnak90

Next time, just tag with {{db-g11}}. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 22:06, 20 May 2013 (UTC)

User:Yuanyong

Just like last time. Don't blank. Tag with {{db-g11}}. Ramaksoud2000 ^{(Talk to me)} 04:00, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I noted your comment, and if I have more similar complaints from other users then I will consider adjusting my policy. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:11, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

I didn't mean to block you!

I don't know how that happened, I was on the talk page of a user where you had reverted spam, and when I clicked the link for spamuserblock was horrified to see "Mean as custard has been blocked". I am extremely sorry to have spoiled your virgin block log, but I hope my unblock comment makes it clear the block was unintended and undeserved. Apologies again, JohnCD (talk) 07:32, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Division of Global Affairs, Rutgers University – Newark may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 19:10, 1 June 2013 (UTC)

Procedural question

Hey Mean, procedural question for you. When you see a promotional user page or sandbox, is it better to blank it as per WP:SPAM, or leave it alone and nominate it for WP:SPEEDY? I've been doing the latter because more often than not, it's also a promotional username, so I'll use either {{db-spamuser}} or {{db-spamuser-sandbox}} and then report them to WP:UAA. Just wanted to know what you think... thanks! --Drm310 (talk) 15:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

I tend to use {{db-spamuser}} or {{db-spam}} in blatant cases where an admin should consider blocking the user, otherwise just blank the page and maybe leave a warning on the user talk page. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:32, 3 June 2013 (UTC)

Ansaldo STS

I see some merit (some) in your edits, but you are too broad and sweeping. Such a large edit is alway contestable .... and as you seem to believe that everyon is using Wikipedia for sales and marketing, I feel that you are lacking WP:NPOV. 00:34, 5 June 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhtpbank (talk • contribs)

If other editors agreed with your point of view, I would change my approach. But they don't, so I won't. . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:12, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

A few points (1) I have not added any content to the page (2) You need to act with more WP:CONSENSUS. (3) I have placed a comment on the talk page ... so if you continue to revert, and keep deleting large sections of this article without discussion then you may find yourself being blocked. Bhtpbank (talk) 10:23, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

My reversion applied solely to a large edit made by a user (who has made no other edits to Wikipedia) on 30.5.13. It was clearly intended to be promotional and it was impossible to separate out the flagrant advertising from the potentially useful (but uncited) material. Wikipedia:Don't shoot yourself in the foot has been known to apply to editors who threaten to have me blocked. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:35, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

As you have now violated WP:3RR, we shall now test that. I shall be posting a complaint on the noticeboard. Bhtpbank (talk) 12:44, 5 June 2013 (UTC)

I have posted a complaint on the noticeboard Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

I have taken this issue to the Village Pump [1]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bhtpbank (talk • contribs) 09:38, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

Advert reappears

Hi Custard, just wanted to let you know that the advert you blanked out at User talk:Sophiaabellatoday re-appeared last month as User:Sophiaabella29. Jay (talk) 23:00, 9 June 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar

Wanted to add my thanks for your patient efforts to work on improving the quality of Wikipedia. As per the recent discussion at the pump, we seem to agree that the jargon and puffery like "solutions" needs to be toned down. I am working on many of the software company articles that seem to be heavily into this. A somewhat related one is the litany of products and buzzwords. Many of the articles seem to be chock-full of acronyms, perhaps to get higher scores on searches? From time to time these get reverted, but I hope rationality will win in the end and we can get articles that explain things in plain English. Much appreciated. W Nowicki (talk) 16:31, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Fraggle81. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions to Vivada Inland Waterways because it did not appear constructive. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Fraggle81 (talk) 15:53, 16 June 2013 (UTC)

Buffett Early Childhood Fund

I have edited the language to fit the criteria. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elizabethbecf (talk • contribs) 19:03, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Buffett Early Childhood Fund

It asserts notability, and is not irreparable. Take the issues to WP:AfD, please. Bearian (talk) 19:15, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

This is my first time creating a Wiki page. It is not intended to be promotional, simply informational. I am utilizing information already on the web to create the content. Any help with language changes and editing are much appreciated. It is still a work in progress, please do not tag for deletion. (Elizabethbecf (talk) 14:12, 16 July 2013 (UTC))

OK, but you should not remove tags from the page until the issues that they highlight have been adressed. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:25, 16 July 2013 (UTC)

Requesting reason for undoing revision

I had undertaken revision of the article:- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cow_protection_movement

This revision was suggested at my talk page when I had requested an article for creation with title "Cow Protection in India"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Ntu129

Please tell what is needed to publish articles with changes.Ntu129 (talk) 09:01, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

You were attempting to add topical content to a historical article. A much more relevant article on the subject which you might like to consider improving is Cattle slaughter in India. . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:51, 29 June 2013 (UTC)

Hudson's Bay Company Revert

Hi,

I was just curious - why did you remove the link to the career site from the wiki page? I just want to know as I thought it was factual and would like to understand the difference between having the career site vs. the regular consumer site?

Thanks Kbray999 (talk) 22:32, 4 July 2013 (UTC)kbray999

Slalom Consulting

Hi there - Noticed you have contributed to the Slalom Consulting Page. Would you be interested in receiving factual information from Slalom to contribute to the page in the future? I work on behalf of Slalom representing their communications program. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JRYamani (talk • contribs) 21:10, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

Lafayette Federal Credit Union

Good afternoon - I'm unsure why the edits I have made about my credit union keep getting changed. :( I have used a template from another credit union's wikipedia page to set up more accurate information...I'm not trying to "promote" the credit union...just provide factual information from their website. Can you please clarify what I need to do so you stop removing my page? I don't understand why you are able to remove my edits, but I can't take off the ones that are untrue and make it a comprehensive page about my credit union. Can you please clarify what exactly you are asking that I remove/change? I've looked at many different credit union wikipedia pages and can't see how mine is that different? Please let me know. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfuzqcuoh498 (talk • contribs) 19:07, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

"Listening to member needs, and responding accordingly, has made us the trusted financial institution that we are today" is just a tiny segment of the heap of promotional b*llsh*t that you added to the article. If you do it again your account will be blocked. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:19, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Mean as custard - There is no need to block my account or use offensive language. If you are insisting that I alter the content to be more objective then I will work to do so. With that said, when I make the changes to the page can you please not automatically block my account and remove my content. Let me know what still needs to be changed and I will happily comply. My main objective here is to create a page for my credit union that is more accurate so people can understand what Lafayette Federal Credit Union is. If your goal is to ensure that Wikipedia is not biased, then please help me in this process to edit my page. Thank you for your assistance. :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfuzqcuoh498 (talk • contribs) 13:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

You clearly have a serious conflict of interest with this subject, and your previous edits show your aim is purely promotional, not to produce an objective, balanced article. I suggest you could demonstrate your good faith by editing other unrelated articles instead, such as Sir Stephen Glynne, 9th Baronet, Spécial Dalida or Tuszyny, Bydgoszcz County. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:14, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand why my good faith is being questioned here. As a new Wikipedia user, I was just trying to provide some updated and accurate information on my credit union. I was using information that is available to the public from Lafayette's website to post. Perhaps this was due to my misunderstanding of Wikipedia and its regulations, but I do not believe I should be blocked for simply trying to improve the page's content. My intention is to provide an accurate reflection of my credit union, not to promote the business as you have suggested. The current content is extremely outdated and frankly not entirely true. If you would like the content I created to be changed to not be "promotional" I am happy to do that, but you must provide me the opportunity to do so without the repercussions of being blocked as a user. I will be able to satisfy us both by creating an accurate page that has objective content to improve the information Wikipedia provides. If the changes still need to be modified I will be happy to hear you out and change what you think is necessary rather than completely removing my page. Also, I do not believe my edits to any of the pages you have suggested would be valuable, as I know nothing about them. Lafayette has been my credit union for 20 years, which is why I consider this page modification to be extremely important. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.159.72.253 (talk) 17:27, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

If you insist on updating the article, I suggest that instead of relying on the organisation's website for material (which is very likely to be promotional), you should find references in unrelated third-party sources. . . Mean as custard (talk) 19:11, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

Please notify newbies when you tag pages for deletion

Hi Mean as Custard, I nearly deleted user:Hydrofabs before I noticed they still had a redlinked talkpage. Please remember to notify the author when you tag pages for deletion. ϢereSpielChequers 08:37, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

August 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Robert Wood Johnson Medical School may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s and 1 "[]"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * Center for Clinical and Translational Sciences] (a clinical pharmacology inpatient facility, formerly the Clinical Research Center

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 12:49, 5 August 2013 (UTC)

Bridge Alliance

Please advise on how one can edit the Bridge Alliance page to keep it up to date, and without any form of promotion. I have tried several times to make it as neutral as possible, but it does not seem to meet your criteria. Perhaps you can provide some guidelines, because right now the reverted page is outdated and readers will only obtain wrong information from it. I am sure that is not the purpose of Wikipedia? - to provide readers with wrong information.

CheersBrand&comms (talk) 01:25, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

"A combined customer base of over 500 million and an extensive footprint allow members to develop and launch roaming and enterprise solutions" is the sort of stuff you find in an advertisement or a press release, not an encyclopedia article. Your changes come from the organisation's promotional material, not third-party, unbiased sources. Your user name also suggests you may have a conflict of interest with the subject. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:01, 7 August 2013 (UTC)

I see what you mean, from the example you quoted. I will attempt to rephrase it in a non-promotional way and use third party sources. How can I continue to contribute to the Bridge Alliance page? Can I still edit the page or shall I post my suggested text on the Bridge Alliance talk page? ThanksBrand&comms (talk) 06:41, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

Real NMMP

Mean as Custard you are editing a Law Enforcement page when you mess with New Mexico Mounted Patrol.

The former administration is under investigation for wrongdoing, and possible criminal charges are pending.

Do not edit the Wiki page for New Mexico Mounted Patrol unless you are serving in an official capacity for New Mexico Mounted Patrol, which you are not.

This is your one and only warning.

RealNMMP

This raises so many Wikipedia policy issues I won't even bother to list them, as you are about to be blocked. . . Mean as custard (talk) 21:54, 11 August 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Editor's Barnstar
	Thank you so much for offering me help regarding wikipedia .I really appreciate the effort and am immediately fixing all the articles so as to meet the wikipedia standards . Muchakata (talk) 13:06, 14 August 2013 (UTC)

Explanation required

you have put a tag for speedy deletion for the article Brandscan but it is not a promotional company. It is just a new area for market research which uses the disguised games as its approach. i request you to go through it again and see it partially please. If you want I can give you more citations which makes the source notable. Kindly help me put the article on Wiki. It would be of huge help. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Makmares (talk • contribs) 16:44, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

It was not tagged for speedy deletion because it was promotional, but only because it did not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Citations on their own do not make the subject notable; the article itself must explain why the subject is notable. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:26, 17 August 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Airomo

Hello Mean as custard. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Airomo, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: First source at least is enough to indicate notability for A7. take to AfD if necessary. . Thank you. GedUK  11:24, 19 August 2013 (UTC)

User:ThinPrint

[2] Wouldn't the process for if their page has an advert and nothing else be to tag it for G11? Or have I missed something? MM (Report findings) ^{(Past espionage)} 14:45, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

This relates to a 3-year-old edit, so I won't even bother to ignore this non-issue. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:32, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

Removal of Content from Hinduja Global Solutions Limited page

It has been noticed that a substantial amount of information regarding the page(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduja_Global_Solutions_Limited) in question has been removed. I would like to know the reason on account of which the content has been deleted, so that the re-structuring of the page can be proceeded with. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RajShettyWiki (talk • contribs) 14:15, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Because it consisted mainly of ludicrously promotional crap like "Our cost-effective and value rich solutions help our client partners maximize their operations to their competitive advantage.". . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:19, 2 September 2013 (UTC)

Flextronics

Thank you for making the edits to Flextronics to reduce the promotional material. I thought it was good information, but the language needed to be toned down. I noticed Flextronics page was not very informative compared to other similar companies, so tried to beef it up, but I could see how some of the things I pasted into it might have been considered promotional. I'll try to make it more informative, not promotional, in the future. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bopeterg (talk • contribs) 15:38, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

RE: User:DANTAH

Hi, Just a reminder to notify the page creator when you nominate something for speedy deletion, which you failed to do for User:DANTAH. The user has since blanked the page, and I have nominated it under G7. Thanks, Mdann52 (talk) 12:19, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

As I expect this user to be permanently blocked, notification seems unnecessary. . .Mean as custard (talk) 15:01, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

Per WP:CSD "Users nominating a page for speedy deletion should specify which criterion/criteria the page meets, and should notify the page creator and any major contributors". --Mdann52talk to me! 13:58, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

September 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to NETA may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *the [[International Electrical Testing Association]] (formerly the National Electrical Testing Association

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 15:26, 6 September 2013 (UTC)

SAMT

Can you please stop reverting my edits? That project is relevant to the acronym.--Micru (talk) 16:24, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

There is no mention of this in either of the two articles linked, therefore it has no validity as a disambiguation entry. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:58, 10 September 2013 (UTC)

Genome Valley

dear editor, the information in wikipedia article, Genome Valley is outdated, and it is getting effected due to some sock puppet users, I request your kind self to update it to the most recent version, I think constructive edits can be retained by other editors.Zanzeer4 (talk) 12:48, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Institut Skill-Tech

Hello Mean as custard, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Institut Skill-Tech, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: "Note that educational institutions are not eligible under this criterion. See CSD:A7". You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Shirt58 (talk) 13:30, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

Talkbacker.com redirect

Talkbacker.com has no affiliation with Harry Knowles. Why did you revert the page to a redirect? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Schamblin (talk • contribs) 19:06, 11 September 2013 (UTC)

It was either that or tag it for speedy deletion. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:26, 12 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 13

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Profero, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages COI and Digital (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:00, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Re: Redgiantbiko

Hi Mean as custard. Thanks for the feedback on the Red Giant Software wiki page. I'll go ahead and remove the new copy and update according to the correct standards. Redgiantbiko (talk) 17:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

RE: Paspaley

Have been working to remove promotional material while leaving historical fact. This is an industry with a dearth of reliable history referenced online, and not much else where either.Xzorba100 (talk) 06:00, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

deleted links to apps

Why did you delete the two App links I provided on the iphoneoraphy listing? I do not own or create these apps. It's not self promotion. I saw that other apps listed have links so I provided two more. Since the others were left with their links intact it could be speculated by others that the editor who deleted them either developed the other apps or has a specific interest in them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hottincat (talk • contribs) 13:47, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

I was following the guidelines in WP:ELNO. The entries you added were the only ones with external links. . . Mean as custard (talk) 13:54, 21 September 2013 (UTC)

Reality Changers

Hi there - I've got a question for you about this edit to the Reality Changers article. The Template:Infobox_non-profit includes an entry for an organization's mission statement. I simply entered the mission statement as I found it at the organization's website. If it's promotional, it's no more promotional than any other mission statement. Would you please self-revert and re-add the mission statement? Thanks. Dohn joe (talk) 17:07, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Mission statements are usually promotional and add little to the article, and as such generally do not belong on Wilipedia, unless they have been commented on by third-party sources. If you can paraphrase the 'mission' in the main body of the article in non-promotional language, that may be a solution to the problem. . Mean as custard (talk) 17:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I generally agree that promotional language should be reduced or eliminated, especially in the body. But what about this template, which explicitly asks for a mission statement to be added? Dohn joe (talk) 17:43, 23 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi - unless you have a good reason not to follow the template, I plan to reinsert the mission statement there. Thanks. Dohn joe (talk) 19:52, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

In the template, 'Mission' is intended as a brief summary in a few words of a non-profit organisation's charitable mission, not a long rambling self-promotional mission statement. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:08, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Well, but on the template page, "Mission" wikilinks directly to Mission statement. Dohn joe (talk) 20:25, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Ipanema Technologies

Sorry to bother.

On Sept 5th, you reverted the changes to the Ipanema Technologies page. I'd like to discuss this.

You cautioned that the adjustments were promotional and thus have been taken down. I'd like your insight into how to fix things. We have already:

• Posted the proposed changes to the Companies Project page, along with explanation of potential conflict of interest

• Posted the proposed changes to Ipanema's talk page, while flagging it on the Companies Project page. We left these proposed changes for a month in an effort to seek feedback before we did anything.

We made the changes because the existing Ipanema page was outdated, lingering from many years ago. As a result, the information on it was factually inaccurate.

We kept material non-promotional and cited extensively to external sources. We quoted external experts. We linked constantly to many of these publications. We also mentioned competitors, in keeping with what Ipanema's competitors have done.

Please let me know how we can go about fixing this. Thank you.

DianneDianneDianne (talk) 10:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

The proposed version posted on the talk page still reads more like a press release or an advertisement than an encyclopedia article, with buzzword-laden promotional language such as "focuses on helping enterprises. . . ". However if there are specific errors of fact in the article, then there is no problem with replacing this with properly-cited corrections. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:35, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

I don't understand

"Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you."

Could you tell me which rule exactly did I break? The wiki page I made is just an "about" page dedicated to the company that has been founded and operated in my country for 140 years. I really see what's so bad about it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stefanm93 (talk • contribs) 15:20, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

"We have been working hard to offer the best quality of our products to our consumers", etc. etc. - see WP:Spam. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:31, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Hi Mean as custard, thanks for help with Sysco

Hi Mean as custard,

Thanks for jumping in and helping with the Sysco article. You might want to take a look at the aspect of the unrefrigerated drop sites, which is interesting in its own right, how a major corporation could make this clumsy a mistake,---and a Sysco employee made three edits. I thanked Heredenj for helping out, who then shared with me that they want to be transparent and are a Sysco employee. And the edits were in fact helpful, that on Sept. 6 per press releases Sysco discontinued the drop site program across the board, and this information got quicker on the page with Heredenj than without. And I told him or her that wikipedia policy asks paid advocates to please instead suggest changes on the Talk page.

Anyway, I think more eyes looking at the material is good, and the whole idea of inviting more people into the tent.

If this topic interests you, please, by all means, jump in.  :>) FriendlyRiverOtter (talk) 16:17, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

Collinson Grant

You have interrupted my attempt to edit the page twice within 30 minutes. Please could you wait until you see the changes I am trying to make before doing so for a third time? I am trying to remove promotional material and correct errors and outdated content in the current version. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stevebrauner (talk • contribs) 11:01, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

It is easier to remove promotional material if you don't begin by adding more. . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:03, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Biosof LLC

Dear Mr. Mean. I was trying to populate the page for bioosof llc and so far just pasted in some content. The plan was to finish up this entry by the end of the day with verifiable information however If what ever is there now does not meet the wikipedia standards then feel free to delete the entry and we will just try creating a new entry with encyclopedic content when we done writing it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gyachdavrg (talk • contribs) 16:04, 30 September 2013 (UTC)

Undid revision 575763022 by Mean as custard

Please can you explain why you are removing my contribution of the ISF calculator?

This tax is extremely difficult for most people to calculate and this calculator allows them to so it easily.

You remove it but do not give a reason?

It is, in fact, the only online ISF calculator in existence and extremely useful to those looking for a way to understand and calculate this tax. As wikipedia is there to provide information and knowledge on a particular subject it should be clear that anyone seeking information on this tax is likely to do so because they need to calculate it and thus I believe this calculator is primordial in that respect. Removing it from the page is, thus, likely to deny the individual access to something that could very well provide them with the exact information that led them to visiting the wikipedia page in the first place.

Why would you visit a page about a certain form of taxation if not to work out how much one may have to pay?

I shall re-insert it for the above reason and trust that you understand why it is a valid contribution.

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by South French Property (talk • contribs) 05:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by South French Property (talk • contribs) 21:37, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

@South French Property: I ran a Google search for "Calculatrice impôt sur ​​la fortune française" and found several other pages which offer ISF calculators. RHF did not appear in the search results. Also, it gives a bad impression that your only edits to Wikipedia have been to add a link to a site that your username suggests you may be affiliated with. Do not add this link again. DPRoberts534 (talk) 06:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

@Mean as custard: Remember to indicate in your edit summary your reason for reverting an edit if it is not obvious vandalism. DPRoberts534 (talk) 06:13, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Toastmasters page edits

Hey, why did you remove all the links to Toastmasters media? MikeRaffety (talk) 19:05, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

See WP:EL. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

MRO

Can you explain why you have delete IAI/Bedek as MRO company ? Danny Goldman (talk) 19:13, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Because it is a disambiguation page, not an article about MRO, whatever that is. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:23, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Removal of content from the Cloudnine Hospitals Wiki page

Hi,

Can you please give us specific sentences or para which you think were promotional? This would help us to tone down the content in our future participation.

Looking forward for a quick reply here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Its SnehaGupta (talk • contribs) 11:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

"Cloudnine is providing quality services with innovation and integrity." and al the other similar drivel I removed from the article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 11:43, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Mousesports

please stop editing the entry from mousesports, as long as there is that site "Nihilum" that goes nowhere I have the right to add an official fan page and the only one available to the page. also please stop wasting my time, I will add it as soon as you remove the revision, if you continue doing this I will build a script and automatically rewrite your edits. Cheers

[This user has since been permanently blocked as a result]. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Re:Somnio

Sorry for undo that articles because I just trust a sysop editing.--Ng Pey Shih 07 (talk) 08:52, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Horsefeathers

Hi, I don't understand why you remove the brand history and complete brand information of Horsefeathers and you forward it again to the Marx's movie. There was only a text about history, which itself can't be promotional. And when I browse Wiki I see brand pages of Adidas, Nike, etc..... What's the difference??? In addition Burton Snowboards even edvertise their online shop on the bottom of the page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Burton_snowboards). An that is for sure promotional! It seem a bit unfair to me that you favor the "famous and big" brands.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horsefeathersclothing (talk • contribs) 12:23, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Ps: This brand has over 20 years of history, as you could read in the text you've deleted.. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Horsefeathersclothing (talk • contribs) 12:29, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

The content I removed was promotional and unreferenced, and your name shows you have a clear conflict of interest with the subject. The "famous and big" brands justify their existence on Wikipedia by their notability, but their articles are subject to the same scrutiny as any other. I have removed the online shop link from Burton snowboards

Its not Spam or Violence of Copyrights

We are not doing any spam or violence of copyrights when adding in external links, We have official internet rights of 450 Tamil & Kannada films bought from producers for the period of 99 years. We are adding the external links in wikipedia page for films which internet rights are with us so that any user who is reading information in wikipedia page can watch that film. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CinemaJunction (talk • contribs) 12:18, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

You did not explain this on your user talk page when challenged. in any case, adding links to sites with which you are affiliated is discouraged, and editing on behalf of an organisation is prohibited. . .Mean as custard (talk) 12:46, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to GAM Holding may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• intermediaries, financial advisers and private investors through two brands – Julius Baer Funds (distributed exclusively by Swiss & Global Asset Management and GAM.<ref name="HistGAM" />

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:30, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Kenan Crnkić may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• it was pronounced, inter alia, the best company in Europe and among Top 50 in the world.{dubious}} After seven fruitful years he stepped out from the position of CEO and dedicated his efforts

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 10:22, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Aesymnetea is not the same as Aesymnetes

Aesymnetea is the form of governement. Aesymnetes were called the elected oficials. Aisymniteia (talk) 14:14, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Mean as custard. You have new messages at [[User talk:Aisymniteia#Proposed deletion of Aesymnetea|Aisymniteia's talk page]].
Message added 14:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

QVVERTYVS (hm?) 14:17, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Re: UAA and other editor behavior noticeboards (AIV, RFPP, SPI)

New reports to UAA, AIV, RFPP, and SPI go at the top, not the bottom. --Bigpoliticsfan (talk) 21:15, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I've no idea what all those initials mean, but the page for reporting vandalism says "Please copy and paste an appropriate example to the *VERY BOTTOM* of the page.". . . Mean as custard (talk) 07:13, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Speedy delete question

You placed a CSD alert to my talk page for an article that was not mine. Can you check why I got it? Thanks.--☾Loriendrew☽ ☏(talk) 19:41, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Rollback

Hi there. I have found (randomly) that you incorrectly used the rollback tool here; please use the rollback tool for obvious vandalism or content removal, otherwise use the undo tool. Regards, Küñall (talk) 03:15, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I suspect this is one of those cases where you click on a link before the page has fully loaded, and end up selecting the wrong option. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:09, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Karrimor

I think you may have tagged this as {{advert}} inappropriately. Can you recheck this? It's a company that - before it closed - was recognized as being uncommonly well regarded. I'm not averse to tone fixes but (see comments on talk page) when people have looked at the matter before there doesn't seem to be any actual, positive, improvements, suggested as a result. Perhaps after flicking through the talk page (not too long!) you can see if tone changes are possible and WP:BRD or bullet-list them, or whether the tag is appropriate or not.

Sorry about this - it appears to be tricky to figure what's best when the tone appears from sources to be fairly accurate and neutral, but because of the success of the subject company, may also come over as promotional in tone if the (third party/reputable) sources aren't checked.

The fact the topic and virtually all coverage is of a dissolved company may clarify that there wasn't promotional intent. Your help would be appreciated to help solve the tone issue or at least look at it a bit more to figure what you make of it on a more careful look. The talk page gives an idea of prior discussion.

FT2 ^{(Talk | email)} 09:57, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

OK, I have removed the tag, though I am still a little concerned that the frequent references to quality could be taken at a casual reading to apply to the current incarnation of the name, which is clearly targeted at a much lower segment of the market. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:34, 25 October 2013 (UTC)

Woodchester Mansion

Hi can you tell me why you keep pulling down the paranormal entry for Woodchester Mansion. The mansion has a history of ghost sightings and I have worked there and researched for 12 years compiling information which hundreds of paranormal groups find useful. Is it the nature of the content i.e not being proveable content or some other reason. Kind Regards fotoraptor — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fotoraptor (talk • contribs) 13:55, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

In this case the information would need to have been published by unbiased secondary sources to show its reliability and notability. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:00, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Most of the information has been published by the recognised body ASSAP and the Woodchester investigations have been published in Jason Karls Book 20th centuary Ghosts I wrote the article for him so there is a secondary form of referance to everything I have written. I am the resident Paranormal Investigator at Woodchester Mansion and have cited these reports on BBC The One Show. SyFi Channel Ghost Hunters International and The History Channels Great British Ghosts season 1. to name a few. These are relevant articles to the History of our Mansion I did not give media links to publications or TV shows as I felt this was self promoting and against wikipedia policy. is there a way round putting this information up on the page ? Kind Regards Chris Howley (aka fotoraptor) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fotoraptor (talk • contribs) 14:06, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

Anything added to the article must be verified by providing proper citations per Wikipedia guidelines. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:10, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

PGDCM

I fixed the redirect of PGDCM, but as a heads up, note that there was no consensus for deletion in the previous deletion discussion. But for what it's worth, I think I'd have !voted for a redirect as well. AdventurousSquirrel (talk) 11:25, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Fire Services in the United Kingdom

Hi Mean as custard, Just wanted to know why you had removed the new section I had added in for Fire Services in the United Kingdom? My first edit so I may have done something simple wrong. Advice greatly appreciated.

--Michellebennettone (talk) 21:53, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

The information was too detailed, appeared to have been copied directly from an original source, and generally did not appear to fit in with the rest of the article's content. . . Mean as custard (talk) 22:01, 7 November 2013 (UTC)

Rob Johnson

You have reverted a couple of times at Rob Johnson (politician) to reintroduce claims that Johnson was "inept" and suggesting "imcompetence" on his part. The references provided aren't sufficient to justify unqualified use of these terms. This is probably something that would have been better dealt with on the article talk page rather than a revert. Hack (talk) 02:22, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

I tend to the view that all politicians are inept and imcompetent unless they can prove otherwise. . . Mean as custard (talk) 08:40, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

Enbridge COIN

Hi, I have started a conflict of interest investigation on IP 161.141.1.1 as that IP is owned by Enbridge corporation and has been doing a lot of pro-Enbridge edits to the Enbridge article. As you have also contributed to that article I thought you might be interested to have a look. Cheers, Djapa Owen (talk) 16:21, 8 November 2013 (UTC)

wbu article

	wbu article
	hello this site below is totally wrong editet!!! we need to change it ..its not vandalism.... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Boxing_Union Energyfighter (talk) 17:04, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Who are "we" and in what way is this cited content wrong ? . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:07, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

wbu article

wbu article

we are the wbu registered in 2010 in germany one year before when the wbu in usa was registered new and did not work well and serious. they try to take over but we are to strong . please watch our website to see its true. www.wbu-boxing.com we have all rights to use logo and name. and wikipedia was perfect edited until this giancarlo di luca edited totally wrong. and i am the wbu president: Torsten Knille Energyfighter (talk) 17:22, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Then you have a conflict of interest with the subject and should read WP:COI. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:24, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

wbu article

	wbu article
	ok, but what can we do??? we are telling the truth and they not!!! can i delete the text after colsing the wbu in 2010 in england...so no news about us or the others.....that would be fair......?????? Energyfighter (talk) 17:31, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

That is fair enough; I have reverted the article to the last undisputed version. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:42, 9 November 2013 (UTC)

Dear moderator I am afraid Mr Knlle is totally misleading you - please see source links that not only prove what is being posted by myself are true but one also shows that the World Boxing Union is recognised by the Asoosciation of Boxing Commissioners.

Mr Knille's WBUv organisation should be listed as WBUv as it is not associated with the World Boxing Union of which I am a director - WBU Europe — Preceding unsigned comment added by LucaDiCaro (talk • contribs) 15:17, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

In addition to the above please note: google listing for WBU Boxing - you will see that Mr Knille's 'company' website is even listed as WBU V

More importantly note that I have been able to supply source references - in fact one one of the source references I have made is for the Roy Jones Jr. versus Bobby Gunn WBU World Cruiserweight title - in the background behind Mr Jones Jr. and Mr Gunn is the PRESIDENT of the WORLD BOXING UNION - MR DON LEWIS.

I would hope that this would be sufficient, even for someone that is not a Boxing specialist, to be able to ascertain who is telling the truth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.227.75 (talk) 15:38, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Like I said, I have reverted the article to the last undisputed version. Anything beyond that you can argue amongst yourselves. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:50, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately it isn't as easy as that as the undisputed edit you had changed it to is a previously bogus modified one by Mr Knille, who had managed to get Mr Lewis blocked from updating.

If you want Wikipedia listings to be credible and correct at all times, then surely you should at least verify the source references - and note that Mr Knille's cannot provide any - whereas the ones provided by myself are from varied sources and all from genuine well established boxing magazine websites etc. In fact today there is even an article on Yahoo Eurosport which includes a section on WBU and WBU Europe. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.176.224.77 (talk) 18:14, 10 November 2013 (UTC)

Shoe Show

Just a heads-up — Shoe Show got hijacked by a spammer. I reverted it to an earlier draft. Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 04:42, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nichole de Carle London (Luxury lingerie)

I have started an AfD on this article, which it appears you may have tried to rescue. Please comment therein. Bearian (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

Hello Mean as custard,

Thank you for letting me know you have not accepted my changes to the canadian commercial corporation wiki page. The reason why I updated the page is because the existing information (which was created in 2008) is completely WRONG. The board of directors that are listed no longer have anything to do with the organization. Also, what the organization does has changed and expanded in the last five years. Can you please accept my changes so ACCURATE and CORRECT information is visible. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 205.193.157.2 (talk) 14:33, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

No. You provided no references to support the new information, and it was promotional in tone. . . Mean as custard (talk) 14:39, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Siren interactive page updates

The current Wiki page was out of date so we're attempting to update. please let me know if these adjustments meet your requests for less promotion. Thank you. Siren Interactive — Preceding unsigned comment added by SirenWiki (talk • contribs) 20:38, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Healthline Networks page updates

Hi Mean -- Sorry to keep pissing you off with my inexperienced attempts to update our woefully out of date page. This last time I added a whole bunch of links to a variety of sources to support the information I added. And though *I am* a marketing guy for Healthline, I have done my best to make the information I'm presenting as neutral as possible. I am honestly trying to simply describe the products we've introduced over the last 18 months, update our company leadership roster (we have a new CEO, who was promoted from his COO position just recently) and updates to things like comScore information (I actually had to post *lower* numbers, so no naked self-promotion there!) Anyway, if there's anything else I can do to avoid running afoul of your guidelines, just say the word.

Dgordon healthline (talk) 23:57, 20 November 2013 (UTC)djgordon_healthline

I can tell you work in PR because of the language used - replacing plain English with its equivalent in buzzword-speak, repeatedly using words like solutions is not acceptable in an encyclopedia article. If you want to correct statistics and errors of fact then this is ok as long as they are properly referenced and not just plain external links - see WP:EL. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:33, 21 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 24 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Oasis500 page, your edit caused a cite error (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:43, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Vesta

Hello, as you might have seen, I might be able to rescue Vesta (Software configuration management). Primary sources were easy to find. They seem to be cited by many other ACM and IEEE papers, as well as some other non-reviewed sources which would provide the notability. However, I am busy in real life so it might take a while. There are other projects named "Vesta" so some effort needs to filter out this one. The article title seems a bit odd too, with the extra capital letter. It does seem to be the only software Vesta with an article, so a case could be made for something like Vesta (software) or Vesta (computing) or somesuch, but then it would be ambiguous in the future if there ever is another. So will leave that alone until we figure out if it is worth saving or not. Thanks for all your good work! W Nowicki (talk) 17:33, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

On a different note, I see you noticed all the promotional language that went back into MindTree after I tried to remove some. One idea would have been to just revert the this edit which seems to be from a single-purpose account. But now I see you did one pass on removing the marketing speak. I did some too again, but the language is still not very neutral. Need to keep watching and make sure it does not get bad again. Thanks! W Nowicki (talk) 00:17, 28 November 2013 (UTC)

Promotional?

Hi the info I put on the Young Scot page is not promotional material it's just what Young Scot is! Ryant633 (talk) 18:00, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, but assertions like "They provide information, ideas and incentives to make young people informed, confident and active citizens" need independent, unbiased references to back them up. . . Mean as custard (talk) 18:53, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

What was wrong with the most recent version?! All the info was correct and unpromotional! Ryant633 (talk) 20:41, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

How do I know the information was correct? No sources or references were given, so you might have just made it all up. . .Mean as custard (talk) 22:09, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your attempted help to update the Outfit7 page, however the information you changed it to is several years out of date. I will endeavour to make it less 'promotional' but ultimately I believe accuracy is the more important factor. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ACochraneOutfit7 (talk • contribs) 12:06, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've knocked out most of the promotional content. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:29, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Young Scot Article

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia and really don't have a clue what some of the things added to the Young Scot article mean. I was wondering if you can help me understand them and what I need to of to fix them. (Young Scot is in bold because I don't know how to put links in because I'm new.)Ryant633 (talk) 20:40, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Don't worry; if the subject is notable then someone else will come along sooner or later and improve the article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 22:12, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

Fabrizio Moreira

How you can remove on Fabrizio Moreira page the picture what have copyrights how you can remove the twitter account what's is a verified account? How can say the page is orphan when have links from a large NGO from Washington the IADB (inter American bank) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.113.104.254 (talk) 22:42, 30 November 2013 (UTC)

about my article Fabrizio Moreira

Not sure why you add the tag "orphan" when is clear the article is not an Orphan.

Not sure why you remove the profile picture when the picture clear don't violate any right?

Not sure why you remove the Twitter account when is clear a valid and verified source because is a verified account.

May some of the information you think is "promotional" but thats not allow you to bring the account to a really old and not update version of this bio at least i think so!

Hope you can provide me a little info about your chance and hope at least you help to keep the bio as much update as possible — Preceding unsigned comment added by Inuevayork (talk • contribs) 02:48, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

The only link to the article was from some youth organization which made no claim to notability.

Wikipedia:Twitter#Twitter says links to Twitter are generally discouraged unless they are the subject's only official web presence.

Most of the rest of the article was unreferenced; it claimed he is active in many fields but failed to clarify in which of those fields (if any) he is notable. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:49, 1 December 2013 (UTC)

Virginia Organizing

Hi. If you look at Virginia Organizing, it appears to be written like an ad. However, the text has been simply copied from the website of the company (it's not copyrighted though). (If you look at the hist you'll see that I accidentally thought it was a copy-vio.) What's the best thing to do with it? George8211^{what did I break now?} 10:44, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

If it is copied wholesale from a promotional website then it doesn't belong on Wikipedia, whether or not it is copyright. . . Mean as custard (talk) 10:55, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for clearing it up. Are all the external links (in the article body) neccesary? George8211^{what did I break now?} 20:52, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Guidelines are "External links should not normally be used in the body of an article", though in this case it is not a serious problem. . . Mean as custard (talk) 22:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

What do we do about Wiki user 843? They repeatedly add the promo/copy content. George8211^{what did I break now?} 10:52, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Just keep warning them until they get a final ultimatum and then get blocked. End of problem. . . Mean as custard (talk) 17:25, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

Warning

This is your last warning. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you apparently did in User talk:Manchesterunitedchampions1 and User talk:Associationfootballfan1, you may be blocked from editing. AdamleoHandsomeguy (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Note: It is okay to repeatedly edit a user page or a sandbox as long as it belongs to the user himself. Unless the edits are used in illegal means, such as promotional advertising, then it is considered vandalism. AdamleoHandsomeguy (talk) 05:36, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

When the editing, is excessive, unexplained, and apparently unrelated to Wikipedia then it needs to be investigated. . . Mean as custard (talk) 09:09, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

December 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Cellular Operators Association of India may have broken the syntax by modifying 3 "[]"s and 3 "{}"s likely mistaking one for another. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:49, 7 December 2013 (UTC)

chudleigh

chokay — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xx TheZodiac xX (talk • contribs) 16:09, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Soapbox material - who says?!

Updating content with facts is NOT soapbox - number of employees and capabilities is fact and not subjective. Wikipedia users deserve to have access to information and your opinions about what constitutes soapbox cross the line and are invalid. Please consider researching the facts and also allowing Wikipedia to be the open forum it was created to be to share facts with the public. Kmoruns (talk) 15:08, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

"Facts" like 'the foundation of unwavering customer service was established' . . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:17, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

Exactly like that - multiple customer feedback - if I planned to give any weight or attention to Wikipedia I would request instruction on how to credit the right organizations to make these facts acceptable for Wikipedia standards. Also, your blanket undo removes updates like the number of employees which has grown from 180 in 2008 to 480 in 2013. Not sure of your motives. How does communicating unwavering customer service harm you or anyone else? Wikipedia allows company pages and anyone looking up a company would want to know about customer service. That said, you win. My life call is to focus attention on things that matter. Thus this page will remain outdated. If Wikipedia credibility was your motive, it has definitely decreased. Kmoruns (talk) 15:41, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

World Education Services

Dear Mean as Custard:

I fully appreciate the efforts of Wikipedia contributors and editors, but your contributions to our page have been detrimental. We are a respected, internationally known non-profit. Previously you deleted all of our citations, which we had to painstakingly re-enter and link. Now you're flagging us for being promotional and using buzz words? This entry is informational, factual and has been meticulously sourced with numerous, legitimate 3rd party articles. What more can we do?

If you have suggestions, by all means post them to the talk page or in response here. Please remove the negative flags you have inserted and kindly refrain from making further edits to our page.

Many thanks, Shorewriter 12 Shorewriter12 (talk) 14:15, 27 December 2013 (UTC

It is not your page - see Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. But the fact that you claim it is yours shows you are not qualified to judge whether it is promotional, so I have replaced the tags.

I did not remove any citations, I removed some embedded external links, which are discouraged - see WP:EL.

"offers research-based actionable solutions", "free and reliable resource", "allow employers, professional licensing boards and academic institutions to make well-informed decisions " are just some of the phrases I object to. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:10, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Mean as Custard: Perhaps it was unintentional, but when you made the prior edits to remove the embedded links, all external references were removed, killing the credibility of this page in an instant. Yes, we understand that this is not "our page" per se, however, in the interest of keeping it factual and accurate we have gone to great lengths to only include explanations as sourced by 3rd party articles. This is keeping with the best practices of wikipedia. You would need to contact them. We never source our own website, despite the fact that we are an education non-profit with regulatory oversight. How our organization and services is described by the World Street Journal or Yahoo Finance is not up for debate in this forum. I am removing your flags as these descriptions are sourced appropriately.

thank you, Shorewriter 12

The references were removed by another editor. The examples I gave above were sourced from promotional pieces and press releases, so I have replaced the tags. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:49, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Dear Mean as Custard: I got an independent opinion, and I will concede your point about the buzzwords. I edited the specific sentences you pointed out to remove any buzzwords. Now, what do you suggest I do to get the "This article appears to be written like an advertisement" banner removed?

thank you, Shorewriter12

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your copyedits at Priva BV and numerous other articles. gidonb (talk) 09:04, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

COBOL reference

I am unclear at why you feel the HP PTF page looks like an inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Could you be more specific as this link refer to a tool that allow to compile Pacbase into COBOL whilst Pacbase is discontinued by its editor? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xplot (talk • contribs) 12:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

There is no mention of Pacbase in the article, so there is no indication why your link belongs in an encyclopedia article. . . Mean as custard (talk) 12:58, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Why revert

Why did you revert my good faith edits?H+L Bagels (talk) 22:05, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

One edit was a blatant advertisement. The other two were expressions of opinion not supported by references. . . Mean as custard (talk) 22:07, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Ambassadors

Is the dramedy programme was set in the real Central Asian Republic of Tazbekinstan.

Is the history of Tazbekinstan real?

- FiremanSamFan (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 18:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Project Syndicate edit.

Dear Mean as custard! You removed my edit and said that it 'appeared to constitute vandalism'. Maybe it appeared, but didn't constitute. Should I corroborate each word with quotation? Perhaps there is a procedure of litigation? Instead of rewriting the whole article more or less objectively, I added a strongly disapproving sentence to this commercial. The sentence is as follows:'Project Syndicate is a hallmark of lies, disregard of international law, priority of corporations over national governments, conception of democracy as a series of PR-campaigns brainwashing peoples in the interests of rotten elites'. 1)Example of overt deliberate lie: Andrei Malgin in 'Putin's law' : 'But on Oct. 23, the Supreme Court for the first time officially rejected a European Court of Human Rights decision in a case concerning Alexei Pichugin, a former deputy to Khodorkovsky and head of Yukos' security service who had been sentenced to life imprisonment for fraud'. In reality Pichugin was sentenced by jury for triple homicide and ECHR upheld the verdict. 2)Example of disrespect of international law:Shlomo Ben-Ami in 'Putin's Rearguard Battle' ridicules Putin saying:'For Putin, the agreement reached in 1945 at the Yalta Conference is not dead'. For Shlomo Ben-Ami agreements of Yalta and UN based thereupon are obviously no longer valid. I am a novice at Wikipedia, so please explain me can I balance an advertisement by counter-advertisement or should rewrite the whole article in impartial manner. Best regards, Sturneyturner.Sturneyturner (talk) 00:01, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

I consider those sorts of statements as vandalism unless they have references to an unbiased source. . . Mean as custard (talk) 15:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Unbiased source.

Do I get you right that they can write absolutely anything, but if I quote their articles proving my correct description it's not enough, because they, Project Syndicate, is a biased source? Quotations are not a proof at all, right? Quotations are vandalism? Sorry if I look stupid or incredulous, just your answer sounds kind of unusual. Given that Project Syndicate is a huge conglomerate of disinformation media, aiming among other things to genigrate Russia in the eyes of western audience in order to justify possible use of military means, it is important to describe it in Wikipedia correctly. Regards, Sturneyturner (talk) 19:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC).

Your changes were unreferenced. . . Mean as custard (talk) 20:25, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

TBI

Hi, you undid the addition to TBI that I added and that the NG bot accidentally removed. Can we restore this definition? I believe it is valid. Thanks.