User talk:Mdlusky

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your nomination at Articles for Creation was declined, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/digital label printing was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to request article creation again once the issues have been addressed. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! —fetch ·comms 01:50, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lightning Labels

A tag has been placed on Lightning Labels, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page 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 an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Template:Do not delete - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 16:56, 27 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not all of the articles you mentioned are promotional in nature. Fruit of the Loom and Eli Lilly definitely are not - they are two very high profile companies, and those articles have been scrutinized by many editors over time. Same for Serono, as a unit of Siemens. Chagroon, Osram and Topflight do have issues, and I thank you for bringing them to my attention. Wikipedia has millions of articles, so in many cases a faulty article has merely "slipped under the radar" of editors and administrators. Therefore, it is a standard policy that the existence of supposedly similar articles cannot be used as justification for the existence of a particular article. Read this page about what is considered to be promotional. Additionally, read this page about what makes a company notable enough for a Wikipedia article. If you have any questions, feel free to ask, though I may not respond quickly as I'll be on vacation for the next several days. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 20:36, 29 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Lightning Labels profile

A tag has been placed on Lightning Labels profile requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, 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. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 18:34, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further to your e-mail: I am sorry, but my best advice is: give up! It is obvious that you are promoting your company. Please have the honesty, modesty, realism to wait until someone with no COI comes along and writes about the company.

Re messages not getting through. Did you actually review this edit? Did you wonder why you could not see your text in the normal rendered version of the page. With amazing skill you had placed your text in one of the few places where the MediaWiki software would ignore it! — [[::User:RHaworth|RHaworth]] (talk · contribs) 11:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

request for respect and consideration

This is in response to: RHaworth (talk · contribs) 11:41, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

In your role as a Wikipedia editor, I have three requests: 1. Per Wikipedia policy, please show respect and consideration. “With amazing skill” is obviously sarcastic and is unbecoming of someone in your position; 2. Because I have a business relationship with the company (it is NOT my company), there is an inherent conflict of interest. However, in the spirit of objectivity, this profile is filled with legitimate, third-party references from such high-profile publications as Inc. Magazine. So, while I assembled the information, it’s the media cited in the article that actually WROTE about the company. That should mitigate, if not eliminate, the conflict of interest bias. According to Wikipedia guidelines, one criterion for acceptance of company profiles is noteworthiness. I have documented repeatedly via credible media reports that this company helped pioneer its field—and in some manner should be considered noteworthy for its accomplishments; 3. Wikipedia encourages contributors to submit articles, even “break all the rules,” and seek input and advice. I respectfully asked for your help. Did you review the article and check out the third-party references and verification? Could you offer some constructive advice instead of just telling me to give up? I utilized a number of standing Wikipedia company profiles as models for what I developed. I ask you to exercise your objectivity and give this another look. If you do not feel you are able or willing to help me further, please advise about steps I can take in an effort to get some form of this profile considered for publication in Wikipedia—in alignment with many others already on the site. Thank you.