Madamezingara

Welcome!

Hello, Madamezingara, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.--Herby ^{talk thyme} 12:22, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.

Madamezingara (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

196.207.35.245 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

meta:No open proxies

• Blocking administrator: DerHexer (talk • blocks)

---

Decline reason: Editing via open proxy is generally not allowed, see meta:No open proxies. However, you may be eligible for an exemption from this policy. Please see WP:IPEXEMPT for more details on how to apply for an exemption. — Jayron32.talk.contribs 12:29, 19 June 2008 (UTC)

No fluff, please

See Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#Consequences_of_ignoring_this_guideline. Phlegm Rooster (talk) 11:23, 23 June 2008 (UTC)

Madame Zingara - warning

Please stop editing this article. It is now a well-written little Wikipedia article about a restaurant. You keep turning it into a poorly written advertisement that just appears to be one of the deletable spam articles that turn up all of the time on Wikipedia. I don't know why, with your user name, you would want a badly written article about this restaurant, but it is time for you to stop doing this. Consider this a warning notice that I will ask for you to be blocked if you continue to revert this article to a badly written version. --Blechnic (talk) 05:15, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

I tried, but I couldn't do it in the face of such spamvertising forces

I researched the restaurant/dinner theater to put up a good article, but your unwillingness to let it be an encyclopedia article rather than your personal advertisement makes this impossible. You're unwilling to learn how to write Wikipedia articles correctly, how to source them correctly, and how to make them encyclopedia articles rather than your personal ad. As long as this is the case, as with most conflict of interest articles on Wikipedia you're stuck with a stub written by people who don't care, rather than a good article written by editors who write well.

You've made the decision to try to abuse Wikipedia by using it for advertising. Your decision is interfering with the quality of the article.

Let me know when you decide to permanently back off spamvertising Wikipedia and let editors who can write encyclopedia articles write the article. I might do something. But you don't get to dictate it. If you want advertisement on the web, pay an ad agency.

As an alternative you can request that the article be deleted from Wikipedia.

--Blechnic (talk) 16:02, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for your reply. I do, however, have two questions: Firstly, is it really necessary to be so rude? We really are trying to comply and are not purposefully trying to be obstructive or difficult. Secondly, after perusing Cirque du Soleils entry, it is clear that their restrictions aren't as harsh and they have more carte blanche over what is written. Is there a reason for this?

196.207.35.245 (talk) 07:49, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

You do not seem to be listening. This is rude, to speak to someone you have no intention of listening to. Rudeness seems to demand like. Editors have tried to work with you, but it's not happening from your end. You're not listening.

Whatever is wrong with the Cirque de Soleil entry, please feel free to edit their article to correct it, or comment on the talk page about whatever Wikipedia policy they have violated. We would be glad to have editors apply the same criteria we are applying to your article to theirs. In fact, that is the policy, to apply policy equally across Wikipedia. If they are advertising, point it out and we will remove it. If their article is poorly written spam, point it out and we will remove these sections. In fact, I'll consider a notice for gutting all of their article if it is spam.

Now that we've discussed my rudeness, your rudeness, and the Cirque de Soleil article, I point out that you still have not provided sources as requested for the information you want in your article.

All of this time could have been spent improving your article.

I like articles about small but notable businesses on Wikipedia. I love fine dining, and creative dinner experiences. I write articles about world famous chefs. None of my articles are up for deletion, nor have they been prodded for deletion. They only get minor edits, also. There are some other good editors who have worked on your article. But we can't do anything as long as you won't help with references and you continue to rewrite it poorly. Also, having us go off on wild goose chases about other bad articles doesn't give anyone any more time to work on yours.

--Blechnic (talk) 17:59, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Did you ever consider that because you run a successful restaurant does not mean you should be writing the article about it. My best friend owns a very well-reviewed Italian restaurant. I get to see her for about 5 minutes every other month when she's working if I stop by the restaurant for an early dinner--and she looks frantic for those five minutes. She has not had a vacation since she opened the restaurant over five years ago. She works 20 hour days at best I can figure, having spent a day with her. She does not have an article on Wikipedia for her restaurant, although I can find much more about her place in credible newspapers and magazines than about Madame Zingara. Is she going to write her own article? Where is she going to find the time to learn Wikipedia policies to write her own article?

What if I came to your kitchen, while I was working full time on my other job, read your cookbooks, then took over the Saturday night dinner service? How many return customers would you have? I know, from watching my friend run a dinner service, that I have no idea the level of details put into the fine dining experience.

I admire your ability to do multiple tasks, but putting up a bad article on Wikipedia will only see that it is mercilessly edited and prodded for deletion.

--Blechnic (talk) 18:14, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Hi there I can see there has been some misunderstanding between ourselves and Wikipedia and I'm sorry if we've caused any offence. We're a small company working really hard at our product and have all given up a lot to finally be able to take our product abroad. However, none of us are qualified PR's or media people, so I think we have gone about this in the wrong way. Many people, especially as we are now going abroad, have been asking for more information without the frills, and we thought Wikipedia would be a great way to put out the facts about our company. One of our waitresses, a journalism student, was given the article to write as a project, but obviously she is by no means qualified and I think none of us realised how difficult it would be. So, again, I'm sorry about all of this and request that you please remove all references to Madame Zingara from Wikipedia - we shan't be bothering you anymore.

Many thanks and kind regards Tracy —Preceding unsigned comment added by 196.212.150.110 (talk) 09:28, 6 August 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Madame Zingara

The article Madame Zingara has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non notable theatre company, fails WP:CORP

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. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:59, 28 March 2010 (UTC)