User talk:Fieari/Archive 3

Hi Fieari, thanks for your input on the Watchfinder deletion Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Watchfinder_(2nd_nomination).

I am the digital marketing manager for the company, however I had no input on the original page and like the rest of the Wikipedians on the deletion notices I did feel it was a bit spammy, but until today I have had no experience in editing Wikipedia.

The page has no been recreated by another Wikipedian and I have made a couple of edits, however hopefully this time it is purely informational and not promotional. My hope is to work with you and the other Wikipedians to make sure that the article can remain as a valuable entry to the site rather than be deleted for being promotional again.

I do feel Watchfinder is at least as notable as any other watch retailer that has an article on Wikipedia; fox example as a business we are approximately 8 times the size of Bob's Watches the company mentioned in the deletion note by Koavf, having seen revenues of GBP £68m in our last financial year^[1], we have produced the most watched Rolex video on YouTube^[2][3] and have worked with the UK government to create Watchmaking apprenticeships program to aid the entire industry^[4].

Would you be able to have a look at the recreated page and advise what could be improved upon.

Many thanks

Sean

Was wondering if you'd kindly be interested in assessing Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Heap_(company) (since you participated in the Mixpanel deletion discussion). It seems users DGG and SwisterTwister routinely vote for deletion together without offering analysis, so I wanted to get a third-party involved. I'm not fishing for a keep, but I am looking for a legitimate discussion if possible. Thanks for any consideration. GDWin (talk) GDWin —Preceding undated comment added 22:34, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

Hello Fieari: Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America¹⁰⁰⁰ 15:30, 18 December 2016 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Season's Greetings1}} to send this message

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Perverted-Justice.com/MediaRevision. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 August 19#Perverted-Justice.com/MediaRevision until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Steel1943 (talk) 01:51, 19 August 2020 (UTC)

I'm writing this because you voted on AfD for Publius (publishing system) ariticle previously. I tried to improve the article, bit since I could not find any more reliable sources, I proposed article deletion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Publius (publishing system) (2nd nomination). Thank you. Anton.bersh (talk) 12:29, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in discussions about infoboxes and to edits adding, deleting, collapsing, or removing verifiable information from infoboxes. Due to past disruption in this topic area, a more stringent set of rules called discretionary sanctions is in effect. Any administrator may impose sanctions on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on discretionary sanctions and the Arbitration Committee's decision here. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

–MJL ‐Talk‐^☖ 06:50, 9 November 2021 (UTC)