User talk:Talpatra - Wikipedia

2 people in discussion

Article Images

A tag has been placed on Baci Lingerie, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be a clear copyright infringement. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

This is a notable international retailer with awards which shows notability.Talpatra (talk) 16:38, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. This article was deleted earlier today for similar reasons. If you reinstate a deleted article again, without going through a appropriate process like Deletion Review, your editing privileges may be suspended! Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:47, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Skweez Media, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:53, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

A tag has been placed on Customs4U, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 18:54, 20 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for message

the tone is promotional, with company claims and opinions being presented as if they were hard facts. A couple of examples follow, but the whole article needs reviewing for this

Baci Lingerie serves customers— sells to, serves is PR talk as if you are doing us a favour
hit the ground running — spammy and too informal (as is "touted" later)
top industry shows— says who?
while adhering to Baci’s ongoing goal — unreferenced and unverifiable claim
Social consciousness and philanthropy are integral aspects of the Baci Lingerie company philosophy — presented as hard fact, should be stated as company claim

it's all about what the company sells, little about the company itself other than locations. How many employees? Turnover? Profits? Has the company ever received negative publicity? Who are its competitors?
The only external link you should have is the company website. The others are inappropriate for any page, and would be eventually removed by a bot if a human didn't get there first. In this case, since they are basically advertisements for the company, they are doubly unacceptable.

I hope this clarifies Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I left you a note on your talk page. Thanks.--Talpatra (talk) 13:42, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Hullaballoo Wolfowitz (talk) 16:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Skweez Media 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/Skweez Media 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 high-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 notice from the top of the article. Tawker (talk) 17:36, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Baci Lingerie 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/Baci Lingerie 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 high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

I see that it's at AfD now. One issue, unrelated to Wikipedia, is that your ref 6 generates warnings from WOT and Firefox Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:59, 21 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Ref 6 is from the Body magazine which has been cited in several other articles. I am not sure about it though. --Talpatra (talk) 06:57, 22 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Baci Lingerie, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Moore tornado (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 08:55, 23 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

I have fixed it via Dab solver.--Talpatra (talk) 06:37, 26 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Custom4ulogo.jpg. 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. James086^Talk 04:59, 30 March 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the message. The article got deleted for G11 criteria. I will try to re-create so please, allow some time. Thnaks.--Talpatra (talk) 06:13, 2 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

The whole premise if your article is so flawed that when you create it around company self-publicity its inherently self promotional. Basically you need to work with the independent sources and write up what they say. If that is pretty much next to nothing then this is what the article content should be. You also need to exclude sections such as services, content and studio collaborations because they are like estate agents boards promoting the site rather then reflecting sourced independent content.

Also, where you do have sources, the way you treat them reads in a puffed-up promotional way and doesn't actually reflect what the report says. You state for example The site has been credited as a potential solution for an industry suffering from lagging DVD sales and link a Huffpost report on the AVN Adult Expo but nowhere in the report does it specifically credit Customs4U as a potential solution to declining DVD sales. What it does say is that it is a fresh idea and explains the business model. If that's what the report says then that's what you need to write. If you editorialise then its misrepresenting the source and not acceptable.

Because you have now had 3 goes at this and each one has been promotional I have locked the page from further creation. If you are still determined to do this, I advise you to start a fresh draft in your userspace, write up what the sources actually say and then see how it looks. Spartaz ^Humbug! 08:38, 2 April 2014 (UTC)Reply

Thanks for the note. I have significantly reduced the article and put contents that can be included in an encyclopedic article. Please, check it on my sandbox[1] and let me know if this is still promotional or not. Also, I didn't understand why you want to exclude the services section as there is nothing promotional except information with proper references. Many such articles have this section then why not for this article? Please, let me know your assessment on the article in my sandbox. Thanks,Talpatra (talk) 18:15, 2 April 2014 (UTC)Reply