User talk:Jsuto

Clapf
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Clapf, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://clapf.acts.hu/wiki/doku.php/start. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:16, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from Clapf, a page you have created yourself. If you do not believe the page should be deleted, you can place a tag on the page, under the existing speedy deletion tag (please do not remove the speedy deletion tag), and make your case on the page's talk page. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. GregJackP (talk) 13:49, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. GregJackP (talk) 13:51, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's. JamesBWatson (talk) 13:57, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Reasons for deletion of Clapf
At Talk:Clapf you have written ''clapf is my own product, so I think I have the right to create any entry about it. Not to mention that clapf is open source.'' However, that is not how Wikipedia works: people do not have a "right" to an article about their product. Acceptance of an article depends on its subject having received substantial coverage in independent sources, as you can read in the notability guidelines. Do you have evidence that Clapf has received such coverage? Being open source is also irrelevant to Wikipedia's inclusion criteria: we are neither more nor less likely to include an article because its subject is open source. Also, I urge you to read the guideline on conflict of interest before editing any more on this subject. If you have any questions about these issues please feel welcome to ask me on my talk page. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:39, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

I have removed the speedy deletion tags from the article, as I do not think it qualifies for speedy deletion. Instead there is now a "proposed deletion" template (commonly abbreviated to "prod"). There are several differences, including the fact that a prod does not cause the article to be deleted for a week, which should give time for evidence of notability to be assembled, if the subject is notable. JamesBWatson (talk) 14:47, 12 March 2010 (UTC)