User talk:Rmoehle

KSLU (Saint Louis University)

This article has been deleted as a copyright violation of this website. Feel free to recreate it, minus the copyright violation, with reliable sources. For more information about how to begin, please read up on how to create your first article. AniMate^draw 02:53, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of KSLU (Saint Louis University)

A tag has been placed on KSLU (Saint Louis University) 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 clear 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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), 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. Shadowjams (talk) 06:48, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of "Hook (home automation)"

Hook (home automation), a page you created, has been tagged for deletion, as it meets one or more of the criteria for speedy deletion; specifically, it is obvious advertising or promotional material..

You are welcome to contribute content that complies with our content policies and any applicable inclusion guidelines. However, please do not simply re-create the page with the same content. You may also wish to read our introduction to editing and guide to writing your first article.

Thank you. μ Talk 05:00, 8 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. You can 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 references, and since your product hasn't mean released, it's unlikely to be notable. Your need to give sales figures or similar to show why it's notable.
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.
Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: allows control of anything electric in one's home from a smartphone or computer... and is anticipating delivery in late 2015.

A page for our product... What do we need to do to keep a page on our product live? Hello Rmoehle. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice.
Paid advocates 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, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, 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:Rmoehle. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:12, 9 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]