User talk:LiftPro

Welcome to Wikipedia![edit]

Hello, LiftPro, and welcome to Wikipedia!

An edit that you recently made to Genie Industries seemed to be a test and has been removed. If you want more practice editing, please use the sandbox.

Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Peter Sam Fan 19:07, 11 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Genie[edit]

I should start by apologising that Wikipedia does not do enough to explain to new users what it is not for. The idea is to encourage everyone to edit, but it does mean that a lot of time is wasted to no purpose by people who think it is a social-networking site or a free advertising platform.

Among the things it is not for is advertising or promotion of any kind. It is not even a place for companies to "tell the world" about themselves.

You wrote that "All of the content within that article that I amended was from sources researched online and in industry publications." Yes, but the sources were almost entirely the company's own material, or fairly uncritical descriptive articles or interviews in trade journals. As a result, what you wrote was just what Genie's advertising department would write: a comprehensive catalogue of their products, followed by a glowing description of the company's methods, full of PR-speak and "peacock terms" like unique and innovative:

"continual improvement designed to minimize waste and maximize efficiency... unique Speedy Design Review... Acting quickly is at the root of the Genie company culture... innovative aerial products... Employees are trained to help problem solve customer challenges... changed the way the entire aerial equipment industry goes to market... "

That is the story the company wants to tell about how marvellous it is. There are plenty of places it can do that, but Wikipedia is not one of them: anything like that is deleted at sight. An encyclopedia article should be based mainly on what others say about the subject, not what it says about itself. There is excellent advice from a very experienced Wikipedian in User:Uncle G/On notability#Writing about subjects close to you:

"When writing about subjects that are close to you, don't use your own personal knowledge of the subject, and don't cite yourself, your web site, or the subject's web site. Instead, use what is written about the subject by other people, independently, as your sources. Cite those sources in your very first edit. If you don't have such sources, don't write."

The tone of the article, and your choice of sources, makes it seem likely to me that you are employed by the company or its agents. In that case you should read the guideline Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and the Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Note that you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use ("Paid contributions without disclosure" under section 4), and in some jurisdictions by laws against covert advertising, to disclose your interest in any edits for which you expect to receive remuneration, directly or indirectly.

Before deleting the article, I looked through the history to see whether there was an acceptable earlier version, and decided that there was not. I will reconsider that overnight, and will decide tomorrow whether to restore the last version before your expansion, updating the name and the logo.

Following the advice of WP:PSCOI, you should not edit the article directly, but may make suggestions on the article talk page, understanding that while we want to get things right, we are not here to help promote Genie. I am sorry if this all seems very obstructive, but if Wikipedia allowed companies or people to write their own entries, it would be no more use as an encyclopedia than Facebook.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:56, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Article restored[edit]

I have restored the article, basically in the form it was before your edits, with the title and the infobox updated. Feel free to suggest corrections on the talk page, but the article will not be returned to being a marketing brochure. JohnCD (talk) 21:48, 24 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]