User talk:Adamwillhoeft

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * Welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or sock puppetry.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Retargeting arbitrage
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a search with the contents of Retargeting arbitrage, and it appears to be very similar to another Wikipedia page: Remarketing arbitrage. It is possible that you have accidentally duplicated contents, or made an error while creating the page&mdash; you might want to look at the pages and see if that is the case. If you are intentionally trying to rename an article, please see Help:Moving a page for instructions on how to do this without copying and pasting. If you are trying to move or copy content from one article to a different one, please see Copying within Wikipedia and be sure you have acknowledged the duplication of material in an edit summary to preserve attribution history.

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. CorenSearchBot (talk) 22:00, 11 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Unified marketing
Hello Adamwillhoeft,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Unified marketing for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

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. -War wizard90 (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Unified marketing


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a notice to inform you that a tag has been placed on Unified marketing requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

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 "Click here to 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Drmies (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Adspeak
You'd do a lot better if you didn't use the second person and stopped writing articles like advertisements. Sources would be an excellent addition as well.  Acroterion   (talk)   03:58, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Thank you. I will fix my writing style. Adamwillhoeft (talk) 04:03, 16 January 2015 (UTC)


 * Thanks. Let me know if you'd like a review of something.  Acroterion   (talk)   04:06, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Pretargeting


The article Pretargeting has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * This is altogether too vague. I'm tempted to slap a WP:A1 tag on it, since it is so unclear what this supposed subject is. In addition it's unverified--one of a slew of unverified and unclear articles by this editor.

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

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

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing 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. Drmies (talk) 20:10, 16 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Drmies, please allow me to build this page out properly. I would like to add much more to this topic. Thanks (Adamwillhoeft (talk) 02:58, 24 January 2015 (UTC))

Remarketing arbitrage
Hi Adamwillhoeft, I've noticed you keep removing my possible merge idea on the page you created remarketing arbitrage. I thought I might explain my thinking to you and hopefully we can improve the page (or come to a consensus on the merge) without the back-and-forth that has been going on. I will admit to not being an expert on this topic, which is why I have kept my editing of the actual content to a minimum. But as currently written I am not sure if this is notable by itself, and to my untrained eye behavioral retargeting seems the most obvious choice for a merge (and thus the content might live on without deletion, which is the other fate of an non-notable page). If there is more content to add to the page or reliable sources on the topic, that would show it to be more notable and I will happily agree that the page should exist on its own. What do you think? Zfeinst (talk) 23:53, 19 January 2015 (UTC)

Hi Zfenist, please allow me to build this page out properly. I would like to add much more to this topic. Thanks (Adamwillhoeft (talk) 02:56, 24 January 2015 (UTC))


 * I would love it if you could build this page out fully. However, adding a reference to your own blog does not count as a reliable source - see Identifying reliable sources. Are there any other sources that use this term?  A google search does not show any for me.  Is there more content on this topic to be added?  Zfeinst (talk) 19:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

January 2015
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 07:15, 24 January 2015 (UTC)

A page you started (Remarketing arbitrage) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Remarketing arbitrage, Adamwillhoeft!

Wikipedia editor Ironholds just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"Thanks for writing this article! Please do address the tags left on it :)"

To reply, leave a comment on Ironholds's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Speedy deletion nomination of Remarketing arbitrage


A tag has been placed on Remarketing arbitrage, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page 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 acceptable page. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item G11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,. Clicking that button will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit |the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. You are welcome to edit the page to fix this problem, but please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. As well as removing promotional phrasing, it helps to add factual encyclopaedic information to the page, and add citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 2602:302:D89:C79:6803:687A:DAEB:37F8 (talk) 20:49, 30 March 2015 (UTC)

E-mail
I've emailed the article to you in case you can properly source it, but here is the content of what I sent to you as far as advice goes:

I'm emailing you the content of the article. It is, however, still too promotional to be used on Wikipedia. There is also an issue of sourcing, since you didn't really show enough to prove that this is anything other than a neologism, a recently created term. Neologisms can seem notable if they appear to be used frequently, but to show notability for the specific term/practice you have to show a lot of coverage in reliable sources that specifically use this term.

By reliable sources I mean things such as official textbooks, newspaper articles, and other places that would pass muster at the reliable sources noticeboard. Self-published sources like your blog are almost never usable as reliable sources because of how easy it is to create a self-published source. Generally speaking, SPS are only usable if the source is routinely used as a source in reliable sources (think peer-reviewed journals, textbooks, newspapers, etc) and/or is routinely quoted by these RS as a reliable source itself. This needs to specifically be the blog and not the individual themselves since by nature SPS are not given any verifiable editorial oversight other than by the writer themselves.

Now as for why the article sounded promotional, I think that was likely because you wrote it in a very casual manner, like you would a blog post. I don't think that you meant it to come across as promotional necessarily, but this is one of the pitfalls of being too casual in an article- especially if you link to your own blog that mentions the Wikipedia article. That gives off the impression that you created this and that you created the Wikipedia article to give it legitimacy. This may not necessarily be the case, but you have to understand that this is how it can come across.

Try to avoid sentences like "To increase your remarketing arbitrage ROI immediately, anyone could implement this quite easily". Using pronouns like "you" should be avoided, as should words like "quite easily" because those are very often seen as subjective. What can be easy for one is not so easy for someone else and terms like this are almost always used as marketing buzzwords.

What I can add to this is that sometimes new terms or concepts take a very long time to catch on. There are some terms/concepts that can be somewhat frequently used- sometimes even very popular, but until you get the coverage it's still a neologism. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  06:17, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of People-based marketing


A tag has been placed on People-based marketing, 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 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 "Click here to 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. NawlinWiki (talk) 15:46, 16 June 2015 (UTC)