User talk:FrankAli91

Welcome!

Hello, Mxs1967, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Maxxis does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. 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, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below 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 my talk page. Again, welcome! -&copy;2016 Compassionate727( Talk )( Contributions ) 15:57, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Sockpuppet investigation
-&copy;2016 Compassionate727( Talk )( Contributions ) 15:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice and sending links to help with this, which I am currently reading. Mxs1967 (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Maxxis
I'm sorry about freaking you out. You're editing patterned is similar to that of most people who are just trying to promote their company. If you are in some way affiliated with them, be it that you are employed by them or something else like that, you are highly discouraged from editing that page.

That said, you seem like you are genuinely interested in making a constructive article. That surprised me, in a good way. Unfortunately, as it currently is, it's not acceptable. The first issue is that the article is too promotional, and would fail CSD G11. I would offer to help with this, and did try, but I honestly don't have any experience here. Once you fix that, it would stop failing the criteria for speedy deletion, but that's not all that needs to be done. Something contributing to the problem is the fact that you are so far only using the company's official website. In order to establish notability and to help verify the information, reliable independent sources are needed. Finding these would also likely help with the promotional tone.

Something else you should look into is the Manual of Style. I've never read the entire thing, but it does contain useful formatting information. Some notable problems with your current article are the section headers, which need to be in sentence case, there needs to be a lead which summarizes the article (and in this case the company). Another thing to note are that external links are almost never acceptable in the body of an article.

Lastly, I apologize for not assuming good faith. This is something that I, as a remarkably cynical person, struggle with. Hopefully I haven't turned you completely off to editing. Wikipedia has a high learning curve, and it takes a lot of time to pick up on. I myself have been blocked before. -&copy;2016 Compassionate727( Talk )( Contributions ) 16:24, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, you have been really helpful. I will look at writing it offline and getting it checked before posting any edits. In the mean time I was wondering ...What is the process with the investigation that was opened? Not used it before so I was wondering what (if anything) I needed to do there? Mxs1967 (talk) 16:27, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
 * There is no complicated process, if that's what your asking. I simply wanted to open an investigation, and so I did, although I used a tool, Twinkle, to provide the formatting, as I don't know all that. As far as what you need to do is concerned, there probably isn't anything you do. I'm expecting that it'll be decided that, because was given a soft block over the username policy instead of a hard block as a promotion-only account, this account is legitimate, and not a sockpuppet. -&copy;2016 Compassionate727( Talk )( Contributions ) 16:44, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Okay, thank you for your help. Complicated but a good learning curve, appreciate the advice. Mxs1967 (talk) 08:40, 9 March 2016 (UTC)