User talk:Bubbyhead

Reply
Thanks for message, unfortunately there are so many problems it's hard to know where to start
 * It's clear from your comments that you are User:Tanaoy. Although you have made no attempt to hide this, that account is blocked, and evading the block by creating another account is viewed as sock puppet behaviour, and leads to indefinite blocking. If you want to create a new account you must request an unblock of the original account to do so. The procedure is in the box, and I'll leave it to another admin to consider any request you make.
 * 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. Most of your text was sourced only to the company, not an independent source.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
 * A few examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: Utilizing industrial internet in their business separates Tana from its competitors significantly as the pioneer of smart heavy machines... one of the leading manufacturers... agile network company... proactive customer service company
 * The article is littered with ™ and ® symbols. It's not our job to protect your marks


 * it's all about what the company does, little about the company itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
 * 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 sites.
 * the article was a copyright violation. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. But in any case the copyrighted text is far too promotional to be useful for Wikipedia's purposes, so there would not be any point in your jumping through all the hoops that are required.
 * You have a conflict of interest when editing this article, which you have declared. As an employee 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. 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:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:    . You say that you are leaving the company. I think you will need to make that clear if you request an unblock and new user name.
 * You are right about there being no absolute ban on COI editing, although it's bound to attract attention, but the block is for infringing our user name policies by using a company or product name.
 * Any article can be recreated but I have concerns about Most of the information on which the article is based on has been gathered by interviewing one employee and based on my own work as a communications assistant in Tana Oy.. That doesn't sound like reliable sources as defined above, and may be original research.

I'm sorry if this is all bad news, but if you want to try again, you must get the block reviewed first. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  13:46, 30 December 2015 (UTC)