User talk:Dwamianm

Copyright problems with Campgladiator
Hello. Concerning your contribution, Campgladiator, please note that Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text or images obtained from other web sites or printed material, without the permission of the author(s). This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.campgladiator.com/about.html. As a copyright violation, Campgladiator appears to qualify for deletion under the speedy deletion criteria. Campgladiator has been tagged for deletion, and may have been deleted by the time you see this message. If you believe that the article or image is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under the Creative Commons Attribution/Share-Alike License (CC-BY-SA) then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author, leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Campgladiator and send an email with the message to . See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that it is licensed under the CC-BY-SA license, leave a note at Talk:Campgladiator with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you hold the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the CC-BY-SA and GFDL, and note that you have done so on Talk:Campgladiator.

However, for textual content, you may simply consider rewriting the content in your own words. While contributions are appreciated, Wikipedia must require all contributors to understand and comply with its copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright concerns very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Thank you. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Hello, I'm 99.136.254.88. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. 99.136.254.88 (talk) 15:56, 11 February 2013 (UTC)

Status and Advice
As reviewing administrator, I deleted the article-- for three reasons: first was the copyvio, second was that there was no indication that the business was significant or important, and theird, the article remained promotional--it continued to read as an advertisement.

First of all, a Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. If you have them, try again; if not, there's no chance of an article. A Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release-- say what they do that is important. Remember not to copy from a web site, even your own -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you own the copyright and are willing to give us permission according to WP:DCM (permission that irrevocably gives everyone in the world the right to copy, reuse, and modify the material), the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable. (Thus, there is generally no purpose in giving permission; it is better to rewrite.)

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective clients/purchasers/students--that sort of content is considered promotional.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know.

If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity. and remember that if your organization is notable, other people will know it, and write the article. That you have to write it yourself tends to show just the opposite. The best way of rewriting is to use the WP:Article Wizard, which will guide you towards an acceptable article if one is possible.

For further information see our FAQ about business, organizations, and articles like this and also WP:FIRST.  DGG ( talk ) 16:32, 11 February 2013 (UTC)