User talk:Kingporus

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. 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, you can just type helpme on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here 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. Again, welcome! Reconsider !  03:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Runka.com
A tag has been placed on Runka.com requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for web content. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Reconsider !  03:48, 22 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey! I've responded to your comment on Talk:Runka. Let's see if we can sort this out without having to go through dispute resolution. I'd advise you to stop editing the article itself before we come to a consensus; any more editing would count as edit warring, which is more serious than a single revert. Edit warring usually results in unpleasant consequences for both parties, so discussion is the way to go. &mdash; Ledgend  Gamer  06:38, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Talygen for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Talygen is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Talygen until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. j⚛e deckertalk 15:29, 11 June 2013 (UTC)


 * Please don't recreate articles that have been deleted following a deletion discussion, as above.Deb (talk) 17:51, 15 August 2013 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for abuse of editing privileges. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Apologies - my internet connection conked out last night before I could unblock you. Please understand this: you were blocked because you kept recreating an article that was deleted as the result of a deletion discussion. When I warned you about this, you just created it under a different title to try to avoid notice. Please now submit your revised version of the article through Articles for creation so that it can be reviewed by a third party. Deb (talk) 08:05, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I'm willing to unblock assuming that you'll agree to the condition mentioned by Deb. Also, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. All articles have to establish notability on their own, it's not enough to say that "since article X exists, and subject Y is similar, and article on subject Y should also exist". Thanks for bringing up the other articles though, I'll take a look at them and see how they fit in with policy. Bjelleklang -  talk 22:26, 17 August 2013 (UTC)


 * A word of advice. Over the years, I have seen many editors come here in good faith, thinking that Wikipedia is a good way of publicising some cause that they think is worthwhile, only to see their work be deleted and rejected time and again, until eventually, they leave, thoroughly discouraged, and having wasted goodness knows how much time and effort. It seems to me that there is a risk that you may be going to go the same way. To avoid this, before you decide whether to take up the suggestion of making a submission at Articles for creation, carefully consider the following two points.
 * 1) If the subject of your article does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines, then it the article is likely to be deleted no matter how it is written. So first think carefully whether it does. In doing so, try hard to think how the evidence will look to an independent outsider. If the subject does not satisfy those guidelines, then you will be much better advised to spend your time and efforts trying to publicise the subject somewhere other than Wikipedia, rather than putting a lot of work into something which is doomed to failure.
 * 2) If the subject does satisfy the notability guidelines, then it is essential to make sure that you don't write in a way that reads as trying to promote it, as you past attempts did. The moment I started reading your article, it was obvious to me that it was written by someone who wanted to let me know how good "Talygen" is. A Wikipedia article should be written from a neutral point of view, so that a reader cannot tell whether it was written by someone who thinks the subject of the article is good, by someone who thinks it is bad, or by someone who has no opinion one way or the other.
 * 3) If you haven't a clue what I meant by the last point, because you certainly weren't trying to promote the subject, then that is a first class example of why Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline discourages writing about a subject you have a close connection to. Even if you genuinely intend to write neutrally, it can be difficult or even impossible to do so if you are so closely involved in the subject that you are unable to stand back and see how it looks to an uninvolved outsider.  JamesBWatson (talk) 20:05, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Hello! I have edited my article for neutrality and submitted it to "Articles for Creation". Once this gets approved, I will submit the next set of articles on Cloud Processes, Cloud Technologies and Cloud companies. I feel that Cloud technology and Cloud companies are under represented on Wikipedia, due to unfamiliarity with Wikipedia principles and operating guidelines. Once I am sure that I am in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines, I can submit a lot of content on both Cloud technology and Cloud companies. I should also be able to contribute a lot of articles about new processes. Thanks! Kingporus (talk) 22:51, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Talygen (December 3)
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Arthur goes shopping (talk) 16:32, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Talygen


Hello, Kingporus. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Talygen".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by one of two methods (don't do both): 1) follow the instructions at WP:REFUND/G13, or 2) copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , and click "Save page". An administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 10:35, 8 May 2015 (UTC)