User talk:Eire25

Mouth on Fire article
Hello, thanks for writing this. I’ve just read this article and I’m a bit concerned that it doesn't have any citations to news articles.

That worries me since citations are needed as proof that the theatre company is notable, meaning covered enough in media to get a Wikipedia article on it. Are there any extra citations you can add? If so just edit the article and add citations using the cite tool - I'm concerned since the article may get deleted otherwise. In addition, I recommend deleting the passages in the article that are promotional-sounding in tone, since again these can be considered grounds for deleting the article if not removed. Any questions just let me know. Blythwood (talk) 22:00, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Welcome!
Hello, Eire25, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Mouth on Fire, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! Blythwood (talk) 22:06, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Mouth on Fire


A tag has been placed on Mouth on Fire, 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 "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. JTtheOG (talk) 01:48, 27 January 2016 (UTC)

Coverage, promotion, and notability
Hi! I noticed that you tried to create an article on Mouth on Fire. Unfortunately I had to delete it for two major reasons: the first is that it was very promotional. The second is that it was a copyright violation from the official website, which is likely why it was so promotional. The article also had some issues with notability. I'm going to address these as follows:

First, Wikipedia cannot accept material that has previously been published elsewhere. (WP:COPYVIO) This is because all material is assumed to have been copyrighted by the people who wrote it and publishing it via Wikipedia could lead to legal concerns about copyright. Permission can be granted by filing a ticket via WP:OTRS, but the other problem with using material from elsewhere is that it's almost always written with the intent to promote the subject. For example, using the phrase "innovative yet highly respectful" is fine - even recommended - for the company's own website, but it's not neutral and wouldn't be appropriate for Wikipedia. The catch with giving permission is that the material almost always requires a complete re-write in order to fit the tone and style guides for Wikipedia. (WP:NPOV, WP:STYLE)

Secondly, the article didn't show how the company would pass notability guidelines since it was unsourced. It asserts that it should be notable, but notability must be sourced. The easiest way to do this is to give reviews of the company's performances in places like newspapers. Some websites can be used, but be cautious since not all websites are considered to be reliable sources on Wikipedia. (WP:RS) WP:PRIMARY websites like the theater company's website wouldn't be able to count towards notability because it was written by the company itself. The rule of thumb is that if the source is affiliated with the company and/or is reprinting something from them "as is" or nearly "as is", that would be considered primary. The ins and outs of sourcing can get pretty complicated, so if you need any help on this let me know or try asking for advice at WP:RS/N. It's something that catches most of us on Wikipedia at some point or another. Coverage does not have to be in English, so (for example) if there's coverage in a Gaelic newspaper then that would very likely count towards notability. An example of a good source would be this article, which is a review of their production of Midsummer Night's Dream by the Irish Times. This would also likely be usable, given that the site has won several awards. An unusable source would be something like this blog review. Blogs tend to be self-published sources that do not undergo any sort of editorial oversight that would pass muster at Wikipedia, so those should be approached with caution since most of the time they won't be usable.

Finally, I have to ask: are you affiliated with the company? If so, you will need to be transparent about editing per requirements at WP:COI. If you are, all you need to do is state your conflict of interest. You can still edit, but it does tend to be discouraged because it's very difficult for many people with a COI to edit in a neutral fashion. If you do want to create an article, it's preferable that you create it via the articles for creation process. Doing this will enable your article to be reviewed by another editor prior to being published and if it's declined, you'll have the option to improve and resubmit. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  10:42, 27 January 2016 (UTC)