Hello, Lucspook, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited was Badoo, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! — Unforgettableid ( talk) 00:58, 2 October 2013 (UTC) reply

thanks for the guidance Unforgettableid ( talk). I have read the article you mention. I am not conflicted, I chose the Badoo page to edit because I'd done research on it and have a lot to offer. I apreciate I may have been naieve in some of my edits and I am working to be a better wikipedian. So far though it has been a rather negative experience as a foray into becoming a wikipedian. I have made several attempts to engage positively and create a more balanced article. I appreciate your guidance and hope you will find my contributions improve and we can turn this page into a balanced article. Lucspook ( talk) 13:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm SFK2. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a " soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. SFK2 ( talk) 13:32, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, and thank you for the feedback. I made all edits in good faith to improve the Badoo page in line with all wikipedia's guidelines. I put the proposed changes on the talk page for over a week and there was only one piece of feedback. I'll happily take clear constructive feedback but broad accusations without clear explanations aren't very helpful.

There is nothing in the edits that I have made that are different than on other wikipedia pages and in fact I modeled this page on the Facebook page. Lucspook ( talk) 15:23, 5 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, Lucspook. Your recent edits to Badoo added internal links on common words such as "photos" and "games", including ambiguous words such as "register" and "profile". If you add a link, try to ensure that it goes to the page you intend, and not to a disambiguation page or a page with a similar name that does not treat the topic you have in mind. Try to add links that will inform encyclopedia users on relevant topics. When linking to pages that are relevant to the content of the page you are linking from, include only one such link, generally the first time the idea is mentioned. Please see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking for guidelines on what to link to and what not to link to. Cnilep ( talk) 01:18, 6 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Thanks for the advice ( talk) - i will bear this in mind in future.

Lucspook ( talk) 10:42, 6 August 2013 (UTC) reply

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Badoo. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you.

Diff here.

Cheers, — Unforgettableid ( talk) 00:42, 2 October 2013 (UTC) reply

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Badoo may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• * –[Daily Telegraph]’s Start-Up 100 Awards<ref>{{cite web|last=Yiannopoulos|first=Milo|title=Start-Up 100: the final

Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 13:47, 18 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Badoo, you may be blocked from editing. — Unforgettableid ( talk) 09:06, 24 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Beware! If you continue to use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. — Unforgettableid ( talk) 02:52, 25 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Unforgettableid ( talk), where exactly are you accusing me of soapboxing? I have presented neutral and well sourced material. Lucspook ( talk) 10:15, 25 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Lucspook. I was warning you to avoid posting promotional material. It seems to me that consensus was already established that your proposed text was unacceptable (see discussion). Yet you attempted to add it to the article anyway (diff). So I posted the above warning on your talk page. Cheers! — Unforgettableid ( talk) 03:38, 29 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Hi Unforgettableid ( talk) the content I posted was not the same as the earlier proposed text that was rejected. I took your feedback and rewrote and researched better source material. Please take the time to read and provide feedback on the proposed new sections that are significantly better than the original proposal. Further, the new and revised proposal for a 'Reception' section is more in line with wikipedia's own rules, the ones you pointed me towards. I'd really appreciate your help. I'm not soapboxing, I'm making the page better than the current one. Lucspook ( talk) 16:55, 29 November 2013 (UTC) reply

Before you add new text to a Wikipedia article, if it even vaguely resembles something previously rejected, please wait for consensus to emerge on the Talk page. The body text of the first rejected proposed change was almost identical to that of the second rejected proposed change. Plus, in both cases you added information about the star ratings of this very-controversial company's mobile applications, but you cited primary sources which failed to meet WP:RS. — Unforgettableid ( talk) 06:12, 1 December 2013 (UTC) reply