User talk:Rcchmp

Welcome!

Speedy deletion nomination of Spotngo Wireless

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 Spotngo Wireless, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 removed 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. JumpiMaus (talk) 10:31, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. Please sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~. I deleted your article because

it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. You gave no in-line references, in fact no references of any kind
There's nothing to show that the company is notable, all you tell us is what it sells and its location. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when they are spamlinks to your web pages.
Your article is just a list of what you are selling
Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: and top performance... from Aradial

You have an obvious conflict of interest when editing this article, and you must declare it. You should not be writing about your own company. If you are paid directly or indirectly by any company, you are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Rcchmp. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rcchmp|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please do not edit further until you respond to this COI message.
You cannot own a page about your company, anyone can make relevant and sourced edits

Articles about other companies don't help you. Either they meet our criteria where yours doesn't, or they should be deleted too (I haven't looked yet). No person or company has a right to a Wikipedia page, you must be prepared to follow our rules as explained above. You have twice removed speedy deletion tags yourself, which suggests that you have no interest in following our rules anyway. Next time it happens you will be blocked indefinitely. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

FWIW, I've looked at the other articles and tagged two for speedy deletion, edited one, and left Cisco Systems as it is Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:38, 24 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Aradial AAA and Billing

Hello Rcchmp,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Aradial AAA and Billing for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly say why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Lithopsian (talk) 16:50, 5 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Mean as custard (talk) 18:57, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

I see that you are having trouble getting your articles approved here. You should probably read WP:NOTABLE very carefully before creating any more articles. Between creating several articles all of which were speedily deleted and removing tags that explicitly said not to remove, you're very close to getting blocked. So, just liking your company isn't a good reason for getting a Wikipedia article. There is no right to free publicity. The company, or anything else, needs to be notable. There need to be reliable independent sources to indicate notability. The type of source varies depending on the subject of the article. For example a company website does not establish notability, but a couple of articles about the company in major publications would. In between, possibly a major paper trail of articles in trade literature, perhaps an award or two, might be sufficient. In particular, in the case I tagged and I think in a couple of others, your just wrote what you "knew", but offered no citations even to establish accuracy, let alone notability. Hopefully, the link will point you in the right direction, but if the companies are not ones that a significant number of people might come looking for at Wikipedia (ie. notable) then it might be best to advertise the more traditional way. Lithopsian (talk) 20:09, 6 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Kuru (talk) 13:04, 22 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]