User talk:Kadekl

November 2019

Your addition to Lululemon Athletica has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information. Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:16, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Dennis Bratland. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Peloton (company) have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:20, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Microsoft Teams has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.

Dennis Bratland (talk) 17:22, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Kadekl. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Lululemon Athletica, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.

It's very difficult to imagine your edits are not paid promotion, advertising and SEO. Please carefully read the conflict of interest guidelines and ensure you declare any conflicts of interest and work to maintain a neutral point of view in your contributions. Dennis Bratland (talk) 19:57, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Bratland, no relationship with Lululemon, just a follower of theirs. In defense, I believe that I state only facts and write neutrally in my edit. Below are a few statements that I used that you may be referring to and my interpretation of them-

"success" = growth (their sales have grown $640 million this year). "double its mens sales" = a goal they are working toward. These statements are not intended to be promotional in any way.

Although new to contributing to Wikipedia, I believe this is an important piece of their marketing campaign and critical to this section of their page. Thus, I would ask if you would edit any concerns rather than delete the entire piece. Thank you. Kadekl (talk) 22:49, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You have made a series of edits to various pages that are virtually identical to the types of edits made by contractors doing search engine optimization or brand management for a list of clients. Such as hopping around a group of unrelated in totally different industries companies adding very biased sounding and selectively positive news. Editors simply interested in editing Wikipedia usually have a different pattern, for example editing many times on a group of related topics, or on a single article. It's very rare for a brand new Wikipedia editor to use the {{Citation}} template perfectly on their very first edit, and doing so in a new row added to a wikitable, again, perfect on the first try. It suggests significant experience, using other user names or IP addresses.

Please don't reveal any information about yourself or your past editing. I'm not asking. I'm only informing you that it looks like paid editing. As long as you've read the COI guidelines and you're doing your best to follow them, I don't have anything to add. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 23:24, 20 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Dennis Bratland, thanks for the response and sharing your logic. I am not a paid editor, I just made a list of things that I'm interested in contributing to and they happen to be in different industries. In regards to first tries, I'm shocked that my meticulousness is being used against me- it took me a LONG time to nail down that wikitable.

In sum, I'm frustrated that you've removed nearly every addition I've made. It feels like a personal attack and is discouraging to make future contributions knowing you will shut it down (for example, I wrote about a canyon near me and you remove it as being "blatant advertising and promotion". How is a canyon paying me?). I believe your SEO profiling of me is steering your decisions and is hard for me to work around. One constructive takeaway I have from your thoughts is that most of my comments appear positive and I will work on improving my neutrality. Kadekl (talk) 00:00, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not true. You revised two of your edits and I didn't revert them. I didn't revert your edit to JoJo Rabbit. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 00:45, 21 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Kadekl. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by DES ^(talk)_{DESiegel Contribs} 01:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi Kadekl! You created a thread called Any way to view a deleted revision? at Wikipedia:Teahouse, but it has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please create a new thread.

Archival by Lowercase sigmabot III, notification delivery by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} (ban this bot) or {{nobots}} (ban all bots) on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:01, 30 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A tip

Take a look at WP:Notability and WP:NCORP. Those pages explain the criteria that your new article Awardco will be measured against. Right now, your article lacks any references to significant coverage of the company in independent, reliable sources. Whether the subject of an article is notable (in the Wikipedia sense) is the key factor in articles that aren't deleted. If the subject is notable, even a poorly written article is kept; if the subject isn't notable, even the best written article is likely to be deleted. So demonstrating Awardco's notability is the challenge you face. Good luck! Schazjmd (talk) 01:11, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip User:Schazjmd, I'll do some more research to try and find more significant sources. Kadekl (talk) 16:51, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Awardco

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Awardco, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may 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, person, or point of view 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/Organizations 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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. DGG ( talk ) 05:31, 4 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Husbands (band) (February 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HitroMilanese was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please see WP:NBAND and improve the draft accordingly.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Husbands (band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Hitro talk 09:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Kadekl! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Hitro talk 09:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Husbands (band) (June 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Skyshifter was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of music-related topics). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Close, but not yet. The Paste review is good and I also found this from Consequence, but even then that's more significant coverage of Cuatro than the band themselves. The other sources provided in the article doesn't seem reliable for establishing notability. (Note that student papers aren't the best for notability — see WP:RSSM).

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Husbands (band) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Skyshiftertalk 00:01, 13 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]