Danabrillante

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bob Brillante.
• To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the . Please remember to link to the submission!
• You can also get live chat help from experienced editors.

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Abdullah Alam (talk) 09:31, 28 October 2012 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation

Bob Brillante, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you are more than welcome to continue submitting work to Articles for Creation.

• If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

T.I.M^(Contact) 02:31, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

"Removing vandalism"

Please do not accuse other editors of vandalism in your edit summaries, when it appears merely to be editing at odds with your possibly biased point of view. . . Mean as custard (talk) 16:53, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello, Danabrillante. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• 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.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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.

PLEASE TAKE THESE WARNINGS SERIOUSLY

• You have been warned by other editors here [1] and here [2] about your recent disruptive edits. Since you are the subject's wife, you shouldn't be adding your promotional edits to either Bob Brillante or Florida's News Channel. Please read WP:COI. Do NOT re-add your materials to either article. Instead, discuss any proposed changes on the articles' talk pages. You will find the "talk page" tab at the top of each entry. If you keep reverting others' edits, you will be guilty of WP:EDITWAR and WP:3RR. Do not falsely accuse other editors of "vandalism" when they are following Wikipedia policies and you are not. In fact, in your recent edits, you vandalized four different maintenance tags. If you keep it up, you are headed not only for a block, but most likely, and most unfortunately, for the public humiliation of Bob Brillante and his entire family because of his wife having been caught making promotional edits to the two articles relating to him. I am going to take your case to the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, and am very seriously considering taking Bob Brillante to Articles for Deletion, since having been a partner in a small, failed company as well as a partner in another company that never operated are hardly the standards for notability per Wikipedia guidelines. Qworty (talk) 18:48, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

Read WP:CANVASS and desist at once

Please read WP:CANVASS and desist at once. Your edits here [3] and here [4] are in violation of this policy. Look, I realize you are a newcomer, but you really have no idea at all what you're doing here on Wikipedia. Every time you make a move, you violate some policy or other. So please listen to me now. Your only legitimate option is to discuss your proposed changes on the TALK PAGES of the two articles you are editing. Go there and make your arguments there. This is standard Wikipedia practice. The talk pages are easy to find--just click on the "talk page" tab at the top of the article you want to talk about. As it stands, you are guilty of WP:COI, vandalizing maintenance tags, throwing false allegations around, WP:EDITWAR, and now WP:CANVASS. Since you are so unfamiliar with policy, the next thing you do will probably be a mistake as well. You need to listen to me on this. You are going down the wrong path, and you need to stop before it is too late. Qworty (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

FYI, the talk pages are located here [5] and here [6]. Please go to those places and make your arguments there. This is standard Wikipedia practice. Thank you. Qworty (talk) 21:22, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

RE:Content Disputes

Danabrillante: You are absolutely in violation of many of Wikipedia's core policies. Your concern for the article would be admirable, except you have a conflict of interest (making the rest of the policy breaches look to be even worse) and you are in fact engaged in an edit war against a user who is correctly modifying the article to meet community standards. Please keep in mind, you do not own the article and may not edit war to impose a promotional tone on the article content (coincidentally, also a policy violation). If you do not begin using article talk pages to discuss these changes you would like to make, it will inevitably and very very soon lead to a temporary block of your Wikipedia account. Also, while reaching out for a third opinion in a dispute is recommended, it is not appropriate to hunt out people who would support you instead of discussing the issue calmly. Please read the other editors messages again, they provide several very helpful links to essays and policy sheets. T.I.M^(Contact) 03:55, 2 November 2012 (UTC)