User talk:ChazMcGreedly

Potential conflict of interest

Hi! I noticed that submitting SourceLink, LLC is your first and only edit. There's also a comment on the page that makes it look as if you are an employee of SourceLink and you expressed frustration over that contributions from employees of the company are heavily discouraged.

Please be aware that if you were sent here by User:Matthewhaskell, this could be seen as meatpuppetry (WP:MEAT) and that recruiting someone to come and add the article for you can be seen as spam. Also, if this is the same user, be aware that this can be seen as sockpuppetry and is seen as an abuse of the system.

What I recommend is that you look into soliciting the help from an experienced editor from Wikipedia:WikiProject Business to help you write the article. They would not only help cull the material that looks to be advertising in tone, but they would also help write the article so it could potentially meet notability guidelines. It's highly recommended that you go through this route rather than continually submitting it to AfC via one of the company's employees.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:50, 13 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Potential conflict of interest

Hello ChazMcGreedly. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SourceLink, LLC, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to you, your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.Tokyogirl79 (talk) 06:52, 13 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. However, the reviewer felt that a few things need to be fixed before it is accepted. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit once you feel they have been resolved. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:submit}} to the top of the article.)

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/SourceLink, LLC.
To edit the submission, you can use the edit button at the top of the article, near the search bar
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Help desk or the reviewer's talk page. Alternatively you can ask a reviewer questions via live help

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I declined this because none of the concerns were addressed that kept me from accepting it last time. The article still has a promotional tone to it and concerns over a potential conflict of interest are still present. Be aware that as I said above, it is heavily discouraged for employees of a company to create an article due to the conflict of interest and I want to repeat that here so I can stress how important this is because it's very easy for edits to come off as promotional in tone even when the edits are clearly done in good faith and without the intention to promote or advertise the company. I just want to stress that I don't believe that you are intentionally trying to promote the company or violate WP:ADVERT. Your last post to the page has convinced me of that.

There's no rule completely against it and if the only issue I had with the article was a conflict of interest, I'd have approved the article. There's just issues with the tone of the article. I also want to warn you about some of the sources used in the article. Please be aware that anything released by the company (press releases, web sites, etc) cannot be used as a reliable source to show notability. Articles where the company is only briefly mentioned are generally considered to be only trivial sources. Business listings are also not considered reliable sources. Any source that you use must also mention the company. If the source does not mention the company (even if its about someone in the company) then it does not show how the company itself is notable. Sources that are hidden behind paywalls and/or require someone to sign up to view them cannot be used as reliable sources either. Frustrating, I know, but it's one of the requirements per WP:RS. This is why I want someone from the wikiproject to help you. Some of them have some pretty crafty ways of finding sources to help show notability.

Again, I recommend that you look into getting someone from Wikipedia:WikiProject Business. I personally recommend User:Bjoertvedt since they have done a great deal of edits to Wikipedia and is also an admin on Norwegian Wikipedia. If anyone is qualified to help you, it's this person. Not only is he experienced but he also knows the ins and outs of Wikipedia. I've also notified User:Bobrayner to help you out. He's also an experienced Wikipedian and should be a good help as far as this stuff goes.

I don't want you to get too discouraged. It takes a lot to meet notability guidelines, so keep trying. Hopefully one of the editors I've asked can at least get everything started to where one of you could userfy for the time being. I don't want you to think that I'm just declining the page haphazardly- I do want to see you succeed. The page just isn't ready right now. Tokyogirl79 (talk) 07:28, 13 December 2011 (UTC)tokyogirl79[reply]

Notability

Hi,
I've had a look at the article, and I think it's fixable in terms of neutrality and conflict-of-interest, but there may be a bigger challenge in terms of notability. Are there any other sources you could point out? Feel free to reply on the Articles for Creation page... bobrayner (talk)