Talk:Fuze Box

This article was nominated for deletion on 27 March 2009 (UTC). The result of the discussion was keep.

Article has been removed AT LEAST 4 times[edit]

Article has been removed 3 times under a different name CallWave. Appears to have been recreated a 4th time under the current name and then removed by speedy delete. This is based upon info on user talk page of original creator User:StacyFL. So this now appears to be at least the 5th time this article has been created since its inception. Calltech (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not a valid argument[edit]

Just because an article was deleted in past means it should be deleted again. You should look at the history and the reasons why the article was deleted. There might have been several reasons. That's not a valid argument in my opinion. I have used CallWave products and like them. I have no affiliation with the company. That's not a valid argument in my opinion. I would encourage other seasoned admins to have an unbiased look at CallTech's history and make a decision. In fact Calltech certainly seem to have some vested interest in the conference call/voip chat industry as evident from his talk page Calltech (talk Within the last one year he has tried to delete several articles related to conference call and voip chat.

Thank you.

FabulosWorld (talk —Preceding undated comment added 19:02, 27 March 2009 (UTC).[reply]

User:FabulosWorld apparent COI with this article[edit]

Dear FabulosWorld: Your user page appears to be blatant advertising for a CallWave product, thereby causing some in the community to view with skepticism your claim of no affiliation. So, in the interest of full disclosure, how do you reconcile this? Thanks. Jim Ward (talk·stalk) 08:38, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thats Only Temporary[edit]

I have followed the guidelines provided by the other admins. The article FUZE Meeting was put in AFD and the admins suggested I create a new one under my userpage. It's only temporary. Please look at the talk page for FUZE Meeting deletion review. FUZE Meeting Deletion Review Unfortunately none of the admins have responded in last 2 days. It seems to me that there is more destructiveness than constructiveness.

Is that a good enough explanation for you James?

FabulosWorld (talk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.164.75.101 (talk) 18:32, 29 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What I wrote on the FUZE Meeting AFD Page[edit]

Please provide feedback: I have recreated the FUZE Meeting article following your guidelines. It's currently on my user page here: FUZE Meeting article on my user page Once I get your feedback and approval I would like to put it under the title FUZE Meeting. Thank you very much for all the help. FabulosWorld (talk) 20:11, 27 March 2009 (UTC)FabulosWorld (talk)

Now I am deleting the temporary page on my user page.

FabulosWorld (talk

No Comments?[edit]

User CallTech and others haven't responded. I would like to remove the unnecessary delete tag. Thank you.

FabulosWorld (talk —Preceding unsigned comment added by 204.16.157.172 (talk) 19:02, 31 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You really need to read WP guidelines and the notice on the article. It clearly says Do Not Remove the tag until the AFD discussion is closed by an Admin. Admin removes the tag, not you. Calltech (talk) 15:28, 1 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Major Contributor (and sock puppets) blocked indef[edit]

The major contributor to this article User:FabulosWorld plus his likely sock puppets User:Vchaudhary and User:CrazyAboutTech, have been blocked indefinitely - Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#User:FabulosWorld. Calltech (talk) 13:42, 5 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]