User talk:Englishpauliewallie

May 2017
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Ivana Horvat, a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. –FlyingAce✈talk 20:12, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello Englishpauliewallie. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Ivana Horvat. 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. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice. 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:Englishpauliewallie. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. —C.Fred (talk) 20:36, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have no financial stake in the edit or deletion of this page whatsoever. This page has been deleted previously for not citing the facts abut this has been corrected and all facts placed on thus I page were cites with IMDB and IVANA HORVAT official website.
 * Why, then, did you refer to Horvat as your "client"? —C.Fred (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, neither IMDB nor Horvat's site meet the requirements of independent, reliable sources. IMDB has limited value as a source, and the subject's own website is never independent. —C.Fred (talk) 20:50, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Ivana Horvat is the finance of my client Stefan Kapicic whose page is linked to on here as her fiance. I receive no financial gain from this They were upset that her previous page was deleted when it should not have been as everything shown on there was fact and owned  by her. The page for her television show linked to on here also shows her on there and was verified by Wikipedia. What more can we do to make this acceptable?


 * If you have a paid relationship with a partner of the subject, you have a conflict of interest and should edit carefully.


 * The AfD was pretty clear: notability was not established in multiple independent reliable sources. We'd need to see newspaper articles, magazine stories, or the like written about her in depth before she'd qualify for an article. —C.Fred (talk) 21:03, 9 May 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ivana Horvat


A tag has been placed on Ivana Horvat, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion debate, such as at articles for deletion. (See section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) If a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
 * It 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. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —C.Fred (talk) 20:38, 9 May 2017 (UTC)