User talk:Markgarret

Global Táxi Aéreo

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Global Táxi Aéreo, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.globaltaxiaereo.com.br/ingles/pd_global.html.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Methark Technology

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on Methark Technology, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that 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 general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of Methark Technology and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. RomeEonBmbo (talk) 17:32, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: The problem with the article is that you used the first few paragraphs as a soapbox about their apparent involved in military technologies. Once past that section, you used a variety of marketing words that were not appropriate for an article. In general, your article felt more like a review of the company instead of an encyclopedia article about the company. I recommend that you take a look at some of the articles about companies based in Brazil (a list is available at List of companies of Brazil) and use them as a template to make a new article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:15, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: While the revision is better, it still did not meet the notability guidelines for corporations. You did not provide any references to reliable sources about the company. All of your references either did not mention the company or were irrelevant. The list of products and services is also very vague. For the article to remain on Wikipedia, you need to provide references to news articles about the company. For example, some news organization must have written an article about them and their products. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 19:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: As I mentioned in my previous comments to you, there are several things you can do. The easiest would be to review the articles of other companies in the same industry as Methark and use them as a guide to create the article. I suggest reading Wikipedia:Your first article or the Wikipedia:Article wizard which will help you with writing your first article and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations as that will answer some of your questions about writing about a company. In order for the article to remain on Wikipedia is must meet the notability guidelines and be written in a neutral point of view. By neutral point of view, I mean that the article should not contain any marketing phrases or material and no contain your personal opinions about the company. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 00:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: It is better, but you are still missing the necessary citations from reliable sources establishing the notability of the company. You need to provide references from sources outside of the company before you re-add the article into main space. As for other suggestions, I would remove the entire Delta Labs section as it unsourced and speculative. Please remove the BitTorrent links as such links are not allowed on Wikipedia articles. Lastly, you should remove your name from the bottom of the article. Wikipedia articles are not attributed to the author as an article will have multiple authors.

On a side note, instead of creating a new section for each comment you leave for me, you can just add your comment to the original section you created on my talk page at User talk:Gogo Dodo#Methark Technology. That way all of the comments are kept together. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 06:55, 16 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: Unfortunately, I still do not think that the article meets the notability guidelines for companies. As I stated earlier, you need to find references about the company from major news organizations like newspapers, magazines, trade publications, etc. The included references are either from the company itself or from another Wiki, which is not a valid reference to establish notability. You need to find multiple references from secondary sources that are independent of the company. While English language references are preferable, Portuguese references are acceptable if they are reliable sources. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:26, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Re your message: The voarpelavida.org is not a very good reference as the depth of coverage is not very deep. The saber.sapo.ao reference is not valid as it is a wiki as I mentioned above. I did not read the other references as I don't read PDF files. What you need to find are references that have in-depth coverage about the company. Just mentioning it or covering it very shortly is generally not a good reference. Did you read the notability guideline that I pointed to you? That really does explain what you need in order to make the article. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 20:53, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Style

Could I suggest that you look at some other articles and at WP:NPOV? The aim of Wikipedia is a fairly consistent style of writing with a neutral point of view behind it. Peridon (talk) 21:20, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you must sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:41, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Markgarret. You have new messages at WP:FEED#http:.2F.2Fen.wikipedia.org.2Fwiki.2FUser:Markgarret.2FMethark_Technology.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello, I replied to your request for feedback. I hope my comments/suggestions are useful, but if you have any questions please feel free to contact me. Thanks! Chevy monte carlo 21:31, 18 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your article submission has been declined, and Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Methark Technology was not created. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer, and please feel free to resubmit once the issues have been addressed. (You can do this by adding the text {{subst:AFC submission/submit}} to the top of the article.) Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Alpha Quadrant ^talk 22:55, 20 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Methark Technology concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Methark Technology, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:00, 31 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Methark Technology

Hello Markgarret. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Methark Technology".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Methark Technology}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. HasteurBot (talk) 01:48, 15 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:Methark Logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Methark Logo.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly ^hi! 10:34, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]