User talk:Hercwulf

Speedy deletion nomination of John Mattone


A tag has been placed on John Mattone, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view 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. RileyBugz 会話 投稿記録 21:28, 22 June 2017 (UTC)

Copyright violation
Besides being an utterly blatantly piece of advertising, this was a blatant copyright violation. Wikipedia is not an advertising platform, and if you violated copyright again, you will be blocked from editing.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 02:29, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Hi Fuhghettaboutit, could you please elaborate further? In regards to the article being an utterly blatantly piece of advertising, I provided examples of similar people in Wikipedia (to name a few):

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bren%C3%A9_Brown https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_C._Maxwell https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robin_Sharma

In regards to the article being a blatant copyright violation, I'm authorized by John Mattone to publish a Wiki article. Email John@johnmattone.com if you don't believe me or need confirmation. Could you please provide some guidance? Thank you

Hercwulf (talk) 03:36, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Please read WP:WAX. In short, bad and illegal content abounds and its existence, were these pages equivalent, would be no basis to allow other bad and illegal content. As to the copyright, if this text was suitable (it's not), a person or party has to show they are its owner and release the copyright irrevocably to the world into the public domain or under a free copyright license that is compatible with the free licenses borne by Wikipedia's content (list here), and not just provide permission for use on Wikipedia. This would have to be done in a verifiable manner, not by your statement, because On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog. See Donating copyrighted materials. But the content is highly promotional in tone and content ("proud parents of... John Mattone is widely regarded as one of the world’s top leadership coaches. .... Recently, John was honored...") so it would need a great deal of rewriting even if you obtained its release. This is all aside from the question of whether he is notable enough to merit an article, as we use that word and concept here to indicate that the subject of an article has been substantively written about in published, reliable, secondary sources that are entirely independent of the subject (I don't know whether he is).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:01, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: John Mattone (June 26)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:John Mattone and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong (talk) 20:02, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for copyright violations. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:25, 26 June 2017 (UTC)


 * I was about to decline the unblock request for the same reasons, and I'll also note that you violated the Terms of Use by not declaring your connflict of interest as required, and that you, despite Fuhgettaboutit's explicit warnings, recreated blatantly promotional content which would have been deleted even without the copyright issue. What's unacceptable here is not the block. Huon (talk) 00:35, 6 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for nothing. I can clearly see that you are volunteers without supervision. Now, a conflict of interest is mentioned? I am sure that wiki pages are made by random people with no relationship whatsoever to the source. After all, if someone puts the content under the free copyright license suitable for Wikipedia, some conflict of interest must exist! Most importantly, the so-called copyright materials were simply facts available anywhere on the net. I even followed wiki profiles for other executive coaches. I advice you to also check them since you are all being bias. Even the draft page I made was deleted! Why? It was a draft page! By the way, Fuhgettaboutit warnings came after my first wiki page, which I immediately corrected. Then, a draft was made. Oh well, enjoy whatever power boost this gives you. Targeting me when so many others do whatever they want (I provided examples to Fughwhatever). But, who cares. Have a great weekend!