User talk:RFIPR

Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles you created, as you did with Michael C. Fenenbock. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please do the following:

Place {{hangon}} on the page. Please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag(s).
Make your case on the article's talk page.

Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. - SDPatrolBot (talk) 10:34, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Michael_C._Fenenbock

I noticed you had Wikipedia listed as a reference in the article - this is not a reliable third-party source. Good work with the citations on the rest of the page, though, it's come a ways since the first revision. Z S 08:58, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Glenn Jasper, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. --Jezebel'sPonyo ^{bons mots} 16:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because your username, RFIPR, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 25 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Michael C. Fenenbock for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Michael C. Fenenbock 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/Michael C. Fenenbock 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. bender235 (talk) 09:38, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]