User talk:MrLukowski

Welcome[edit]

Welcome...

Hello, MrLukowski, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like this place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. You may also be interested in our intuitive guide to Wikipedia.

Ling.Nut

Again, welcome! Ling.Nut ^{(talk—WP:3IAR)} 11:29, 5 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Possible conflict of interest[edit]

I'm guessing that this is you. Adding album reviews that you have written yourself to articles could be seen as a conflict of interest, especially if you remove other reviews in favour of yours. It may also be taken as spamming to add links to the organisation for whom you write. You should be careful not to break our guidelines on conflict of interest and spam. --JD554 (talk) 09:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Mr Lukowski. I would reiterate what JD said. Leave the adding of reviews to us because someone might look unfavourably at it and ban you. At the very least, don't remove other places' reviews and it should be just about fine. RB88 (T) 03:17, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, I totally get that, I honestly haven't removed another review since the time I was picked up over it whenever it was, and I hasten to add said review was of a very obscure website - possibly a blog - that had clearly put its own link there, and I suppose while I can't deny there was a self-serving element, I did think the DiS review was of greater public interest, I'd never have done it to P4K etc. I'm the reviews editor of Drowned In Sound and the editor asks me to put our links in where possible, obviously there is a self-serving element there but we are a major website, especially in the UK and there is a matter of a) believing these are a good reviews that a lot of people read - if possibly not so many Americans - and b) the simple fact of the matter being that other sites clearly put THEIR own links in. As I said, I would not delete anybody else's link and haven't done so in an age, and I'd abide by any deletion imposed on us to even out a ten review limit or whatever...

Professional reviews.[edit]

Hi! I'm afraid that I've had to remove the Drowned in Sound reviews that you've added today. The reason for this is that professional reviews are no longer allowed in article infoboxes as outlined at WP:ALBUM. To quote the relevant section - "Professional reviews should no longer be included in the infoboxes, but be described in paragraph form in a "Reception" section. See WP:Albums#Reception." I'm aware that you may still come across articles with reviews in their infobox from time to time, but these reviews should either be deleted or relocated and explained in prose form in the "Reception" section. I just thought that you should know. --Kohoutek1138 (talk) 11:39, 26 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom elections are now open![edit]

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:41, 24 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]