User talk:Aewb

Welcome!
Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Revitalvision
A tag has been placed on Revitalvision, 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 an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 18:23, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Help request with deleted article
I recently posted my first Wiki article and unfortunately it got rejected as being unambiguous adverting or promotion. It also said that the article had copyright infringements. is there anything I can do to make the article acceptable? I believe their are cites to all the sources that were used in the article and our intention is not to use the article for self promotion. We are being featured in a medical journal this week and simply wanted to give readers a place to find more information.

Any tips on how we can make this article acceptable would be appreciated.


 * I'm investigating this one right now, and will reply here soon. Should be within the hour.  Chzz  ►  19:29, 10 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have seen the article.


 * Firstly, The most important thing to realise is that it is very difficult indeed to create an article about something that you are linked with, and therefore it is strongly discouraged. There is, however, a possible alternative route - you can try to make a neutral, well-balanced, well-referenced article in your own user space - not in the live area - and then request that it is reviewed and, if accepted, it is created.


 * The best overall document to read about this is the business FAQ.


 * If you then wish to create an article in user-space, please read through my introduction below, which shows you how to 'play in your own area' - ie how to use a userspace page.


 * The vital thing in any article is the references - to satisfy notability requirements, an article needs significant coverage (not just a passing mention) in reliable sources - and these must be independent of the subject. In other words, there must be newspaper/magazine/books about the subject, and they should be reputable sources of info, not blog sites, and nothing connected with the subject.


 * All the facts in an article should be verifiable - the reader should be able to check the sources for themself (somehow - they don't have to be online; any reliable source that has been published somewhere is fine, as long as sufficient details are provided).


 * It looks like all of the references give information about the general topic, and support the facts asserted, but they do not seem to actually be specifically about RevitalVision. From Google search here, and Google News search here, I can find nothing to indicate that this company is 'notable'.


 * In order to make an article about anything for Wikipedia, the subject of the article must meet the notability guidelines. The basic, most important one is this:
 * "Significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject"
 * So, we would need - for example - newspaper articles *about* the topic - not passing mentions; good sources (like 'proper' newspapers); not blogs; nothing self-published.


 * You can review these guidelines in WP:ORG, WP:GNG and WP:V.


 * If you then think that sufficient reliable sources are available to show that the company meets the notability guidelines, let me know and I will help further in creating an article.


 * Best wishes,  Chzz  ►  20:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Welcome and introduction
Hi, Aewb. This is NOT some automated message...it's from a real person. You can talk to me right now. Welcome to Wikipedia! I noticed you've just joined, and wanted to give you a few tips to get you started. If you have any questions, please talk to us. The tips below should help you to get started. Best of luck!  Chzz  ►  20:13, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Neural vision therapy
A tag has been placed on Neural vision therapy 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 Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see 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  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. Favonian (talk) 20:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Aewb/RevitalVision
A tag has been placed on User:Aewb/RevitalVision, 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 an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  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. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Favonian (talk) 20:34, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Why that site cannot generally be used at Wikipedia
The articles at PubMed Central, and the Abstracts at Pub Med, are not government publications. The copyright is held by the publisher or the author, and ,except for those specifically released upon [[open access]. they are available at PMC for personal use only. The official explanation is at their site  ". The world in this respect and many others is not as we would like  it to be.   [[User:DGG| DGG]] ( talk ) 02:25, 20 August 2009 (UTC)