User talk:Ibt2010

Conflict of interest?

Would appreciate you taking a look at WP:DECLARECOI and, if possible, letting other editors know whether or not you have any personal or professional connection to FaceParty and/or CIS Internet. Thanks. --McGeddon (talk) 13:51, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

>>Hi McGeddon. It's funny you should say this, as I was just wondering the same about you!

Yes, I am aware of the guidelines and I can confirm that I do not work for CIS Internet Ltd nor Faceparty and that Faceparty isn't paying me in anyway to contribute to the Faceparty wiki etc.

I have been a member of Faceparty for a long time, although I am not a member now. I met my fiancé on there, wrote my dissertation on it, have interviewed its staff, been to their offices (to do so) and went to two of their events. I was also one of the people who didn't get deleted around 2008. I believe that I can be considered an authority on the matter on account of my first hand experience. I am fond of Faceparty as it has been a positive influence for me.

It appears to me that you seem to have had negative experiences on Faceparty, based upon your revisions, to the extent that I'd wondered if you were the father/mother of the girl in that article? At times I've felt like you have a conflict of interest, so its interesting to hear you thought the same. It would be nice to hear your side and history.

I think we've realized that we're in an "Edit War" so maybe we should try and discuss matters between us, as I guess we are both stubborn. Having said that, it appears that we are now discussing it, lol! :)

I've also seen your new message on the Faceparty Talk page as well. Will reply to that the second I get a chance! Thanks, Ian. Ibt2010 (talk) 23:53, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

No, I've never used or even looked at the site, the article just ended up on my WP:WATCHLIST at some point. I think I was cleaning up a few of the smaller social network site articles, years ago.

All I'm doing is making sure that the article accurately reflects the information about Faceparty that exists in reliable sources, and that it has as much sourced content as possible. So far as I can see the site never really got much press coverage (without the Register articles it really just seems like reheated press releases) and is only barely clinging onto WP:WEBCRIT, so if you know of any older (offline?) press coverage from your dissertation research, it'd be good to hear about it. --McGeddon (talk) 08:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Ah, that makes total sense! I apologize as I thought you were a troll. Now I understand that you are going by articles you have found without having any knowledge or experience of the subject matter. For your reference, there was a moment where millions of accounts were deleted and that brought outrage to lots of people - some who were journalists. These "haters" would write nonsense articles and this is what you are quoting. I know get you are quoting a troll rather than being a troll yourself, so I apologize.

Yes, good idea. I'd like to see my dissertation again myself, so I will dig it out next time I go to my Mum's.

You are totally right ...when Faceparty was the leading Social Network, it was before the traditional media had really launched on the web. In fact, that was one of the reasons that these old school media companies were desperately trying to buy social networks at the time.

I just feel that if you don't have knowledge of the subject matter, you may be a dangerous person to comment as you are relying on "hater information" and treating it as fact. This is why tabloids are bad.

For your further information, at the time Faceparty was run as a community and by volunteers (although there were a small number of full-time staff) ...a bit like Wikipedia. Anyone could make their own web page on Faceparty. Official announcements from Faceparty staff would carry a green box at the top which certified that it was the opinion of the company. This isn't present on the article you quote. You keep relying on a page that could be written by anyone (like on Wikipedia) as if it is fact. There's nothing to say the journalist from the Register didn't make that page. The journalist from the Register was a troll ...that's clear to EVERYONE who was a member of Faceparty at the time. I'm really not sure you are qualified to comment on this.

I apologize for my time delays of late (absolutely swamped at the moment). However, I have been planning to explain my account of that moment, to help describe the situation. But in a nutshell, CIS Internet went bust meaning the end of Faceparty. The company who bought it only bought 200,000 accounts, meaning several million accounts were deleted. That has nothing to do with age disrimination.

If you're suggesting that the source is unreliable because it was unwittingly (or maliciously) quoting a fake web page written by a Faceparty user, please explain that at the RSN thread and it'll be looked into. --McGeddon (talk) 16:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello again. I noticed you just erased some concerns I and another editor were having about your possible conflict of interest with Faceparty. Would you mind clarifying whether you are employed in any capacity by IBT? --McGeddon (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Hi McGeddon. You need to stop justifying opinions (from that article) that say things such as "a load of cr*p" ...there is no opinion in there and you can't let that kind of language be on these pages. That's really irresponsible of you. I honestly thought better of you there. I did 2 weeks work experience with IBT and that was AGES ago. That photo I took was at one of the events ...anyone could take photos and even though it was a photo area, nearly all of the celeb photos on here are form those kind of things. I honestly feel like there's a witch-hunt against me, when you don't seem to have the slightest clue about what Faceparty was.

You claim that it all looks "PR". Well, there are no claims that say "Faceparty is the best way to meet people" etc. (which would be so if it was just PR). My claims are all facts backed up from non-tabloid sources. Your claims are sensational ...and you can't see it because you don't know the subject matter.

Draft:CIS Internet concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:CIS Internet, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:32, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:CIS Internet

Hello, Ibt2010. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "CIS Internet".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 21:29, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Newfacepartylogo2015withpadding.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Newfacepartylogo2015withpadding.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 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).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:09, 11 October 2016 (UTC)