User talk:INTL C-WrightR

Your submission at Articles for creation: INTL FCStone Inc. (June 27)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.


 * Draft:INTL FCStone Inc. may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:INTL_C-WrightR Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Heliosxeros&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:INTL_C-WrightR reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

EROS message 15:01, 27 June 2018 (UTC)

Hello "'EROS'" - Thank you for your review and feedback on INTL FCStone Inc.. The similarities in content, language and structure between this article and the article on MarketsWiki http://marketswiki.com/wiki/INTL_FCStone_Inc. are due to the fact that I am the writer of both pieces, and adapted the language for both by "de-spinning" INTL corporate marketing materials. I used much of the same language between the two articles because I believe that this language communicates information as succinctly and impartially as possible, and I did not believe that the reader's interest would be served by writing an alternate version paraphrasing the MarketsWiki version for the sole purpose of creating a sense of difference between the two articles. However, I do understand Wikipedia's interest in ensuring that content does not appear to be copied wholesale from other sources, and that Wikipedia readers are treated to unique content at the site. So please let me apologize for my failure to respect those interests by using much of the same language between the two articles. My primary goal is to ensure that updated and additional information in this proposed rewrite of the INTL FCStone INC article (relative to the current version, which is no longer accurate in many facets) makes it online. Asking your advice: would a re-written version that provides a blend of citations to the MarketsWiki content and re-paraphrased passages merit an additional review and possible approval? Or should I just correct/delete the erroneous info on the current entry? Thank you for your guidance. INTL C-WrightR (talk) 16:19, 27 June 2018 (UTC)