User talk:Fortunelounge

Please do not add commercial links (or links to your own private websites) to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or a mere collection of external links. You are, however, encouraged to add content instead of links to the encyclopedia. See the welcome page to learn more. Thanks. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Peyna (talk • contribs)

All good and fine, but...

There's advertising for nonsense, and then there's advertising for encyclopaedic content. Fortune Lounge Group is a large, popular, established group. Therefore they are not advertising to try to get more hits - it is just to explain who they are. Advertising rules do not apply - they are for when people are new and have not got enough users. Clearly Fortunate Lounge Group is already well established. Whilst they ideally shouldn't advertise, that is not enough reason to censor them. They should be able to have their own page.

Clearly the user page was made to userfy what was an incorrect deletion process. The article should never have been deleted in the first place. It is in undeletion review. Advertising should not be a criteria for deletion when the article itself is useful.

If I were to advertise for Madonna would you delete that? No, because she is encyclopaedic. You'd just try to fix it up so that the advertising was not the main thing. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 15:51, 20 December 2005 (UTC)

Fortune Lounge Group article recreated

I have written the article in what I believe is a neutral point of view. In doing so, I felt it was important to mention the spamming controversy, however you should note that I did not present it as fact that FLG was guilty - rather I tried to present both sides of the argument. It is notable that they were shut down for allegations of spamming, and all of the negative attention that they have received in relation to this.

There were some things which I could not find, such as when Fortune Lounge Group started, or who runs it, and also some of the more nitty gritty specifics about the spamming controversy. I was able to find details of the Personal Messenger which seemed to be used by the spammers to spam people with FLG spam, but I cannot be sure precisely how they did it or who it affected. You can feel free to add more to that.

I also had to leave out a couple of links because Wikipedia's anti-spam software prevented them. If you can find alternate versions of these links that make it through the anti-spam software, then it would be appreciated.

I included the awards section as it is in line with music articles that I have written such as Papoose (rapper) and ie.Merge both of whom won international awards. It is a claim of notoriety, and is important in establishing the importance of the Fortune Lounge Group. I only included awards in which FLG won 1st place as the best online casino group in the world. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 07:50, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

Spamming controversy section

You do not own your company's Wikipedia page. Please examine our policies, including WP:NPOV and WP:AUTO. A Wikipedia article must be factual and neutral. The fact that the site was shut down and then reinstated, as reported on independent casino news sites, is a notable event in your company's history, if one that isn't exactly positive. Continually removing it from the page tests my assumption that you are working in good faith to create an encyclopedic entry about the company and suggests that instead, you intend to PRize it as you see fit. Such actions are generally not tolerated here. You are welcome to contribute and help write the article - but not to dominate it and make it fit your expectations. I don't like throwing block threats around, but you must know that deleting negative information from Wikipedia's page about a company you are connected with will not endear you to the Wikipedia community. FCYTravis 09:48, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

We need sources

You most likely are right, but we need to have a source to say that they were not really shut down, and some verification of this. If you can provide this, then add it to the article. We can't do anything without sources. The sources available suggest that they were shut down. Zordrac (talk) Wishy Washy Darwikinian Eventualist 13:08, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

An overdue response

You left a message on my talk page on December 20, however by then I had taken a break from editing Wikipedia for the holidays, and have only returned to "active duty" within the past few days. I see things have progressed quite a bit with the Fortune Lounge Group article in the meantime, and hopefully things have been resolved to your satisfaction. If not, or if there's anything else I can help you with, feel free to leave me another note on my talk page. Cheers! --PeruvianLlama^(spit) 07:49, 13 January 2006 (UTC)

Updating the FLG article

So long as you are updating the article with accurate and verifiable information, there should be no problem. Be bold, and go ahead and make the changes. However the Wikipedia community at large (including admins) are generally sensitive to anything that looks, smells or tastes like spam, advertising, or self-promotion. So be careful that you present the facts in a neutral tone, and don't limit yourself only to "flattering" facts and statistics. A good article should include everything, good and bad, and then the reader can make their own decisions. I hope this is of some use to you. Cheers. --PeruvianLlama^(spit) 02:46, 11 January 2007 (UTC)