User talk:Athomedia77

September 2012[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Camus Cognac was changed by Athomedia77 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.971977 on 2012-09-17T15:40:19+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:40, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Camus Cognac with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Mephistophelian (talk) 16:04, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Camus Cognac[edit]

I saw your edit summaries on the Camus Cognac about the marketing and legal teams reviewing the content of the article. Your marketing and legal departments have no say over what goes into that article. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources have to say about the subject of our articles. As was pointed out to you at the help desk, please read WP:COI, WP:BESTCOI and WP:BFAQ. GB fan 16:54, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Athomedia77. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Camus Cognac, 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.--Orange Mike | Talk 18:22, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for spamming or advertising. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Athomedia est une agence conseil et de déploiement de stratégies sur les médias sociaux. --Orange Mike | Talk 18:29, 17 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]