Rick.nolan
Welcome!
Hello, Rick.nolan, 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! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:22, 1 October 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia. However, please know that editors do not own articles and should respect the work of their fellow contributors. If you create or edit an article, know that others are free to change its content. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:58, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- Further to this, please refrain from making unfounded statements as to intent. It would have been much better to simply ask me what was wrong, rather than to make nonsensical accusations about defending your competitors. As it now stands, the page has numerous issues with regards to its suitability as an encyclopaedia article; the fact that other pages exist does not necessarily justify this one. Keep in mind that Wikipedia pages are not the property of the subjects; what you consider notable may not be suitable for Wikipedia's purposes. --Ckatzchatspy 18:57, 14 October 2008 (UTC)
- What administrator told you to restore it to the "original" version? Where? I've reverted your reversion because the edits made, even by an anonymous editor, were clarifying and succinct, and removed superfluous material. Also, keep this in mind: you do not own this article, and whatever the community decides is the best path and edit for this article is what it will take -- not what you want. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 12:44, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Response edit
The edits was not made by an anonymous editor, they were made by me, but the wikipedia system did not manage to associate my edits with my wikipedia user name. Now, leave the page as it is. It does not belong to you. Or do you imply that anybody can change anything here by saying "even by an anonymous editor". In that case, you are telling me, and all others that we are free to change your contribs.
- Yup. Anyone can change anything. It doesn't mean that others will agree, or that it will meet Wikipedia's policies, guidelines, and community consensus. (When edits are within those bounds, they are accepted over singular viewpoints.) But when you ask others why they are editing "your" page, it implies you think it belongs to you, or that you have some special authority over its contents as its creator. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- I understand that, meaning that Ok, the page belongs to everybody. However, to keep the information as true as possible, and in line with information as written in similar articles, it would be a good manner to at least discuss the content with the original author(s) before changing. Else, wikipedia will loose its authority as a reasonable good source of true information.
- This does not mean that you are a good source of true information. Unless you, as some authority on some subject, have already published material that has been scholar or peer reviewed and is considered reliable. But simply creating/editing an article does not make you an authority on the subject at all. Unless you are closely connected with Munax, in which case you have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 14:40, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Rick, please stop edit warring over this article. As Tony has indicated, it is not your personal property. Further to this, and based on your actions, I would ask if you have some connection to the company. If this is the case, you need to review the conflict of interest guidelines before proceeding further. Again, please listen to the concerns raised about the article, as they have been raised by two administrators. --Ckatzchatspy 16:38, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
- Again, read the new content ! I would like to ask you the same questions: Are YOU related to Picsearch ?
- Rick, you have been warned. You are edit warring, which is contrary to Wikipedia's guidelines; you are also ignoring advice from two site administrators (Cobaltbluetony and myself). Spurious accusations about Picsearch (or any other company) won't fly. I have cleaned up the article to address numerous content and style issues; I would expect you to discuss any concerns on the article talk page rather than simply reverting. --Ckatzchatspy 16:50, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Ckatz's edits up to now look good, and in keeping with conventional styling, formatting, and external linking used here. Please keep in mind that edit warring can get you blocked for a time. As I've said, the community decides, and if you truly feel Ckatz's edits thus far are out of place, we can find other users to offer input.
Consider this first article of yours a learning experience: as you go along, you'll learn more and more what the community expects for truly professional, concise, and encyclopedic articles, and your future contributions will stand on their own more and more. This is our hope for you, in fact. We need all kinds of help! Check out the tutorial and look for things that need to be done. I guarantee you'll always have something to do. Also, don't get too frustrated when more experienced users correct your work: learn from it and master the skills. And keeping a cool head about things will take you very far here. Cheers and happy editing! - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 20:13, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Your recent edits edit
Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 16:47, 16 October 2008 (UTC)
Picsearch's notability has already been verified. If you look at the article and the user's contributions, there were constant concerns raised about the user's conflict of interest, and the advertising tone of the article. Users worked on them, and the article creator revised his views on his article and accepted the direction of the community. Similarly, there is no long description of the products produced by Picsearch; the list remains in the infobox.
Keep in mind that the article Munax is strictly about the company. If its product(s) themselves receive notability or coverage in independent sources sufficient to merit its/their own article(s), it should be self evident. Until then, the focus of the article is the company. With that in mind, the mention of the search engine without its own page is not really a good idea. - CobaltBlueTony™ talk 13:55, 27 October 2008 (UTC)
Munax (warning) edit
Rick, please stop your reverts at Munax. You have already had several explanations as to the issues with the article, issues which were addressed by the rewrite. You've also been told that another article's possible non-compliant state does not justify making the Munax article equally non-compliant. Finally, if you had looked at the Veveo article first, before your revert, you would have seen that I've already reworked it. In short, please stop edit warring and trying to "own" the Munax article. --Ckatzchatspy 07:22, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
November 2008 edit
Welcome to Wikipedia. One or more of the external links you added in this edit to Munax 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. You may wish to read the introduction to editing. Thank you. Flewis(talk) 09:14, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Nomination of GP Bullhound for deletion edit
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article GP Bullhound 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/GP Bullhound 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. Edwardx (talk) 11:33, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
The article Samba Sensors has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:
Non notable company.
While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages 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 page 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. Mccapra (talk) 21:02, 10 June 2019 (UTC)