User talk:Leef5/Archive 1

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Leef5, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! Aboutmovies (talk) 08:07, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Reliv-logo.svg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Reliv-logo.svg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currentlyorphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk 06:11, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

New MLM Article

There's been an article published recently in the The Salt Lake Tribune about the MLM industry. I was wondering if you've read it and want to include any of it in the wiki articles for Monavie, Nu Skin, Xango and USANA.Jean314 (talk) 13:28, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/home/51183138-76/average-companies-distributors-earn.html.csp?page=1

Thanks for head's up. I'm going to tread carefully on this one, as that "source" is from an anti-MLM spokesperson, so a lot of the opinion in that article is severely lackingWP:NPOV. There was some useful data in there, however, perhaps that can be gleaned out where appropriate. I also read Len Clements response to this article, he is recognized as an expert in the field of direct sales and MLM, and thought his response was interesting (minus some of the rebuttal that came across as character attack).

http://www.marketwaveinc.com/docs/OberbeckResponse.pdf

The question is how do we separate useful facts from opinionated material from a non-credible source? Leef5 (talk) 18:02, 27 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm going to move this convo to the USANA Discussion page in case anyone else wants to weigh in on it.Jean314 (talk) 13:07, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

Past Contributions

Hi Leef. I noticed that your user page mentions that you "used to edit Wikipedia roughly 7 years ago for about a year reliably". But your contribution history (mostly dealing with USANA) only goes back as far as 2010. Why the discrepancy? Rhode Island Red (talk) 16:53, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

The "discrepancy" was noted in the sentence immediately following the sentence you quoted. This was a new account since I didn't have access to the old e-mail address, nor could I remember the exact username - something like Bel with 5-6 numbers after it. I'm sure I had a method to my madness in username creation at the time, but its beyond me now.Leef5 (talk) 17:08, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

That's simple enough to figure out. What were some of the articles that you worked on? You can find your user name from the edit history. That's a very easy solution. Rhode Island Red (talk) 19:05, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Good point - I didn't spend a horrendous amount of time researching it. Was easier just to create a new account. Work filters prevent me to go to any gaming sites (just tried a couple). They must use keyword filtering since these are WP articles. For curiosity sake, I may play with it in off-hours when I'm not behind a filter. Leef5 (talk) 19:15, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

You might want to refer to WP:SOCK while you're at it. It has details pertinent to your lost ID situation. Rhode Island Red (talk) 00:31, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

How is that user name hunt going. I'd really like to see this resolved so as to avoid any potential problems with WP:SOCK. It's important that you find that old user name and identify it on your talk page. Rhode Island Red (talk) 22:27, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

There is nothing to resolve. I have no interest in spending the time to find an account from 7+ years ago that I don't remember the exact username of. I was editing totally different articles and WP:CLEANSTART applies. If you have WP:SOCK suspicions, they make your report in the appropriate channels. Coming into my user talk page and making insinuations is unacceptable and is clear WP:HARASSMENT#User_space_harassment. You had a 6-month block for similar transgressions - this behavior is not acceptable and will not be tolerated. Leef5 (talk) 12:49, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Harassment? Your attitude sure changed quickly. A couple of comments ago you said "good point" when I brought this to your attention. WP:CLEANSTART states: "Discontinuing the old account means it will not be used again; it should note on its user page that it is inactive—for example, with the "retired" tag—to prevent the switch being seen as an attempt to sock puppet." WP:SOCK states: "If you have lost the password to an existing Wikipedia account...you may well want to create a new account with a clean password. In such a case, you should post a note on the user page of each account indicating that they are alternative accounts for the same person, and you may well wish to ask an admin to block the old compromised account." I'm not insinuating that you are a sock but I find your explanation and reaction very odd indeed. If you edited WP reliably for a year, surely you remeber at least some of the articles you worked on, and you would therefore be able to identify your former user name from the edit history and post the "retired" tag on the old user account. To claim that you are incapable of remembering your old user name and that you refuse to spend any time thinking about it...well that seems quite a bit off. Rhode Island Red (talk) 14:46, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

Corp Content guidelines

I've posted some ideas on content guidelines for corporations over on the Wikipedia:Companies project[1]. Your thoughts/input there would be appreciated. --Icerat (talk) 14:13, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

I will take a look - thanks for the head's up. Leef5 (talk) 14:54, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

Just as an FYI as an interested party, Rhode Island Red has now joined a ridiculous attempt by another clearly anti-mlm zealot toget me banned under bogus "COI" claims. They're not getting anywhere but you might want to review what's going on. He's now bought his same (POV) approach to the Amway and Amway Australia article.--Icerat (talk) 23:56, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

I've seen some of the Amway edits since it was already on my watchlist. Appears to be WP:Wikistalking to me since he followed you to the COI noticeboard to comment on your activities and now is engaged in his WP:wikilawyering over at the Amway article. Really wish some unbiased editors would join into the discussion on my RfC. HisWP:ownership issues are way out of hand. Leef5 (talk) 19:00, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

Financeguy222

FYI he's reported me for edit-warring[2], I've just done the same.[3]. I'm actually away for the next week, any luck they'll ban the pair of us for a week! :) --Icerat (talk) 20:17, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of ViSalus

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

A tag has been placed on ViSalus requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about it should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you can assert the notability of the subject, . Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the article's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

See the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies.
No offence, but I don't think this article is really the kind of company that Wikipedia wants to advertise for; particularly since WP doesn't do advertising.  I'll leave it to you to tell me if you strongly disagree. -- Who R you? (talk) 10:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Tagging an article for speedy deletion claiming its a scam and referencing scam.com as proof is not within WP guidelines. The article should have been tagged as {{Primary sources}} and not {{notability}}  Leef5  ^{TALK | CONTRIBS} 12:24, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Leef5:  I very much meant the apology I made in AN/I for using the incorrect method for the deletion and I really wish I'd used the right one (also the only reason I didn't post a response here sooner is because we were speaking there and I didn't think of posting back here again); no disrespect was intended at any time and, now that I've seen the article again through the cache at deletion discussion, it is obvious that you put in some time creating this article.  While I have no desire to see your work be lost or go unrecognized, I still feel, for the reasons I hope you understand, that this company/person isn't something that WP really should be advertising or giving even the slightest bit of credibility to.  But I can certainly understand how unsettling it would have been given my having used the wrong procedure; and I assure you that you were correct in your stated assumption that I did so only through my own stupidity and without any intention to produce the likely negative effects.  As stated, I will definitely make an effort to avoid similar F−ups in future.  Cheers  — Who R you? (talk) 06:33, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

WP:ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.

I want to emphsis that you are in no trouble, none what so ever; I merely listed an incident at ANI for a second opinion. I am obligated by the rules of ani to inform you of the post as an article you created was the catylst for its posting. You may find the full detailshere. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:00, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

I just got your message. I csd-ed it only on account of the scam allegations, BUT if it turns out I am in the wrong the other admins have the authority to overturn my deletion. Alternatively, if you would prefer not to wait that long, you may petition for the article's return at Deletion Review. FWIW, I am an inclusionist, and I make every attempt to find reasons for articles to remain here. I take little pleasure in deletion, since IMO it goes against the very essence of an encyclopedia by denying people a chance to learn about an article's subject matter. TomStar81 (Talk) 12:06, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Whoops, just added my comment to AN/I before seeing this message as well. I can wait, it's not a big deal to me if the article is up or not - I ran across this company when I was researching other MLM articles. It seemed to meet the criteria at the time, although I could have spent more time on it to add non-primary sources to it.  Leef5  ^{TALK | CONTRIBS} 12:22, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you both for speaking to me not at me; I just posted on ANI.  Guess I'll see your respective responses there (or by all means here as appropriate). —Who R you? (talk) 18:37, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, don't know what I did there that you fixed with the section heading; anyways, I actually though the last post on this was on my talk page, not on yours Leef5; as mentioned, we can all discuss on ANI or my talk page (or here) if there are any comments, questions, suggestions.  Thx — Who R you? (talk) 18:48, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

No problem - easy fix :) Let's continue on ANI - although some of the discussion is branching off into undelete justifications.  Leef5  ^{TALK | CONTRIBS} 18:51, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ViSalus-logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ViSalus-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:58, 17 August 2011 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:USANA-HQ.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:USANA-HQ.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. We hope (talk) 22:12, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

I found a few free photos on Flickr etc, but they were always of people standing in front of the building. I'll see if the two insiders we have on that article can get us a free version.  Leef5  ^{TALK | CONTRIBS} 00:23, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

ViSalus

Hi Leef5:  I don't see that you've been notified, but I got a notice and ViSalus is now restored.  The restoration notice says that I can apply at AfD to go through this again; but:

1. I note that in the past you've reverted two edits that provided the balanced POV (that is, the truth), that this company is a Pyramid scheme;
2. you've read the article that Dream Focus found about the company and you now know as well as I do that they rip people off;
3. given the lack of any conclusion in that article, it is difficult to see how this info can't reasonably be incorporated into the existing article in a manner that can be true to NPOV;
4. I see from your user page that you pride yourself on a belief in neutrality and NPOV;
5. realistically, having an article here, particularly one that doesn't tell the facts about the, dare I say illegal, business practices of this company, is only going to cause more innocent people to be ripped off by this company and its owner(s);

so I'm hoping, at least until such time as a citable source is available so that the article can provide a balanced summarization of the facts and identify this company as a scam, I'm hoping that you will agree, as creator and almost (save for two IP edits) the only contributor, to delete this company's article under {{db-author}} (or whatever you think appropriate).  At least until such information exists and a neutral and fair article can be created that is not likely to cost innocent fools the money they can't afford to lose.  This article was the first deletion I'd requested that wasn't some simple lone talk page without a main article or a redirect that shouldn't exist or something like that; and so I used the wrong process the first time; but I hope that you'll agree that this is not a company that Wikipedia should give free advertising to with an article.  Alternatively, we can go through the AfD process repeating everything that's already been said; but I hope that when you look at this from a perspective other than someone who's had their work deleted by an improper use of process, I hope that when you look at who and what you must defend in order to keep this article, I hope that you'll agree with me that WP is better without it.  Thanks for your time and attention. — Who R you? (talk) 06:08, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

1. I reverted unsourced edits - This happens frequently on many different MLM companies, from both a promotional and critical angle. If we want to include language that the company is operating an illegal pyramid scheme, that would be a statement of fact that would need to be sourced to an authority on the matter (court typically).
2. That is a good article that should pass the RS test for inclusion of carefully-worded text to the article.
3. Agree - As long as we stick with WP:NPOV, and source WP:RS, we are always on steady ground.
4. That is correct
5. The facts have to be sourced from reliable sources

I don't agree that having an article on WP gives "credibility" to the article subject. As long as the article is neutral and states facts from reliable sources, we are good to go. The article has established notability, and since the article exists, we don't just delete things because of WP:IDONTLIKEIT. I certainly encourage your participation on the article and related talk page. Just remember, we can't refer to unreliable sources like scam.com or any other Internet forum per WP:SPS. Although sometimes they make good dramatic readings, we can't rely on any opinions there any more than we could rely on Visalus distributor websites promoting the company.  Leef5  ^{TALK | CONTRIBS} 11:30, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of ViSalus for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the articleViSalus is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/ViSalus until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Bbb23 (talk) 23:43, 28 August 2011 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ViSalus-logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ViSalus-logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions. If you have a question, place a {{helpme}} template, along with your question, beneath this message.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 20:38, 9 October 2011 (UTC)