Andygold7

Spam in Cadio

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Cadio, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Cadio is blatant advertising for a company, product, group, service or person that would require a substantial rewrite in order to become an encyclopedia article.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Cadio, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. To see the user who deleted the page, click here CSDWarnBot (talk) 19:40, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Cadio

A tag has been placed on Cadio, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Smitty (talk) 07:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Cadio

A proposed deletion template has been added to the article Cadio, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process because of the following concern:

Recreation of a speedily-deleted advert.

All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised because, even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. CaveatLector ^{Talk Contrib} 09:10, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Cadio

I have nominated Cadio, 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/Cadio. 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. CaveatLector ^{Talk Contrib} 17:02, 5 January 2009 (UTC)

Cadio

Please go here to discuss the deletion. CaveatLector ^{Talk Contrib} 18:11, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Article inclusion

The key to article inclusion is citations to substantial independent coverage in reliable sources such as books and articles. Full policy pages are at wp:notability and wp:citations. Please let me know if you have any questions. ChildofMidnight (talk) 17:31, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

Cadio

Andy,

I am not an 'expert' in the field of electronics or electronic advertising; however, that does not really matter in this case. What matters regarding the article you authored is notability. The sources you have provided still do not show why Cadio is notable. Assertions of its uniqueness are just that: assertions until a 3rd party source (that means something that is NOT on Cadio's website or is in any way produced as an advertisement for Cadio) talks about Cadio in this light. This means something on the level of CNet or Wired magazine.

If you can provide these reliable sources, I would support the inclusion of the article in Wikipedia.

But please also know that this decision is NOT up to me. You should familiarize yourself with the guidelines of Notability, reliable sources (linked above), and the manual of style as well as the articles for deletion process. I nominated your article for deletion because it reads like an advertisement (and the version now at User:Andygold7/Cadio still does). (Cross-posted to my talk). CaveatLector ^{Talk Contrib} 08:45, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

User:Andygold7/Cadio

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Andygold7/Cadio, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages: user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for businesses.

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page in question and leave a note on this page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Calton | Talk 13:39, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Morris Frank

A tag has been placed on Morris Frank requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. RadioFan (talk) 14:31, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

June 2010

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article content such as sentences or images. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. JNW (talk) 22:20, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

This is the final warning you will receive regarding your disruptive edits. If you vandalize Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. JNW (talk) 22:57, 20 June 2010 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for your account is being used for nothing but promotional purposes and copyright violations. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 23:26, 20 June 2010 (UTC)