User talk:Nduplan

Locus Technologies

A tag has been placed on Locus Technologies, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which 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 the page 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 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. -Seinfreak37 20:37, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Locus Technologies, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. For more information about creating articles, you may want to read Your first article. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Marasmusine (talk) 07:23, 21 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in Wikipedia. I did see your note in the hangon you placed at the top of the article on Locus Technologies. Wikipedia gets a large number of articles every day which seem to be attempts to advertise the company. They are written in positive, even glowing terms (they are "a leader in their field" or their products are "revolutionary"). Since Wikipedia is written with a neutral point of view this is a problem. Moreover they are often written by someone with a conflict of interest in the content, and frequently fail notability guidelines. If the company has not been featured in numerous, independent publications, or would require a complete rewrite to be acceptable, we generally delete the article (by the criteria for speedy deletion article rule 7 or general rule 11). I hope this helps clarify why your article was deleted, and of course if you have any questions, feel free to leave a note on the bottom of my talk page User talk:TeaDrinker. Best wishes, --TeaDrinker (talk) 16:17, 20 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Howdy, thanks for contacting me. I think the key is to avoid editing in areas where you might be thought to have a conflict of interest. Stories about editors who seem to be promoting their company often are picked up in the press (for instance [1]). I think an article on Environmental data management is a great idea, although for the aforementioned reasons I would suggest avoiding discussing your company. If it seems inevitable and natural to include a reference to your company, you might suggest it on the article talk page. I hope this seems like a reasonable approach, and let me know if there's anything I can help with. Thanks again and best wishes, --TeaDrinker (talk) 17:03, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Environmental data management

A tag has been placed on Environmental data management requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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), 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. MuffledThud (talk) 19:05, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Neno Duplan

The article Neno Duplan has been proposed for deletion because under Wikipedia policy, all biographies of living persons created after March 18, 2010, must have at least one source that directly supports material in the article. The nominator also raised the following concern:

place reason here

If you created the article, please don't take offense. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners or ask at Wikipedia:Help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 07:14, 23 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Locus Technologies

The article Locus Technologies has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Promotional page, all substantial content added by a series of SPAs. Brochure-like content with no evidence presented of notability under WP:CORP, WP:GNG or any other guideline. Sourcing is almost entirely press releases. A WP:BEFORE shows only press releases and press release reprints. This should be removed as advertising.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. David Gerard (talk) 19:30, 12 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]