User talk:Acaryatid

United soybean board

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate your contributions to the United soybean board article, but we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. Perhaps you would like to rewrite the article in your own words. For more information, take a look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Happy editing! Adam ^(talk) 22:37, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, sorry for the confusion but the image must have come from another source since adding those is not in my capabilities.

Politicalfriendster

Hi; I've noticed that you've added politicalfriendster links to many different articles. Please remember that external links must be relevant and useful. At present, they appear to be an attempt to promote politicalfriendster, which is strictly prohibited by Wikipedia policy on spam. Please also remember that every single contribution you make to article namespace must be supported by reliable sources or be deleted. Thank you for editing. Captainktainer * Talk 16:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, The links are provided to the site which is an open source, as Wikipedia is. It was created by a student as part of a Stanford U project and left up for public use. Can you. explain how links to books that have financial interest in providing information is different from linking to an open source information site?

My links to that site were done in the interest of providing additional information about the organizational connections, political ties to funding etc. Other links are made to illustrate the ties between corporate funders, PR groups and front groups, posing as consumer organizations. Sources for those connections require extensive documentation while the friendster requires just a glance.

My grasp of the line between reference and promotion is confused, but all linked, referenced connections do meet reliable source guidelines. All were verified by GMWatch, PRWatch and SourceWatch who track front group activity and corporate political alliances. It is possible to link directly to those sources as an alternative but it requires users to do much more reading than the image review. Bending the rules is not an objective so apologies if that has occurred.

Organic Consumers Association

I noticed that when the Organic Consumers Association page was created, essentially all the content was excerpted directly from the OCA website. This undermines the Wikipedia tenets of both copyright and neutral point of view. ENeville 21:22, 2 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Gotcha, reading all the rules first might have avoided this; live and learn.

Network Solutions

Hi, you added two paragraphs to the article on Network Solutions that are directly lifted from an article at the Online Journal. You may want to rewrite the paragraphs in your own words. Also the wording in the first paragraph added seems highly POV. "SAIC is perhaps most notorious among Internet aficionados for buying the company, Network Solutions Inc (NSI)..." Reservoirhill 02:04, 25 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry my editing skills seem to fall short but every effort is made to try and remember to modify the content to avoid any copyright violation. As a user more familiar with quoting it happens from time to time, again apologies. The interest in adding the details sometimes causes slips.

question...

Please consider whether this contribution of yours wouldn't really belong more appropriately on wikisource -- if it is quoted material -- or integrated into the article on the Church Committee. Geo Swan (talk) 16:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Advancement of Sound Science Center

The article Advancement of Sound Science Center has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The only references appear to be primary sources hosted by an advocacy group. There is no proof of notability and the entire article is a blp nightmare. It was full of links to dead domains (whose url`s were obviously not wp:rs and is unfixable.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. mark nutley (talk) 08:51, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for deletion nomination of Advancement of Sound Science Center

I have nominated Advancement of Sound Science Center, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Advancement of Sound Science Center. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. mark nutley (talk) 10:19, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Organic Consumers Association

The article Organic Consumers Association has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Nonotable advocacy organization: no sources about the subject available that aren't press releases.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Giant Snowman 15:23, 31 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of GM Watch for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GM Watch is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/GM Watch until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Jinkinson talk to me 01:27, 20 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]