User talk:Kiranoush

Speedy deletion of OMFICA
A tag has been placed on OMFICA, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page (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 article 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 article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. EJF (talk) 16:16, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Notability
Hello, I had added the notability banner for the old version of the article which was deleted on 28 March. Then you wrote the new article on 1 April. It was User:Jonny-mt who added the notability tag to the current article. I am sorry but I do not think that the current article satisfies our notability requirements for organisations. For a group, it must have been wrote about in reliable, secondary sources. Have any newspapers or magazines written about your group? If not, the article may be deleted, as Wikipedia is only for content which is notable. Regards, EJF (talk) 11:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Image source problem with Image:OMFICA_Logo_new.png
Thanks for uploading Image:OMFICA_Logo_new.png. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

As well as adding the source, please add a proper copyright licensing tag if the file doesn't have one already. If you created/took the picture, audio, or video then the GFDL-self tag can be used to release it under the GFDL. If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 20:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 20:46, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Open Market For Internet Content Accessibility


The article Open Market For Internet Content Accessibility has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * I couldn't establish that this is WP:NOTABLE. It has been tagged for notability for 7 years without anyone else establishing it either.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Boleyn (talk) 06:23, 31 March 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Website Parse Template


The article Website Parse Template has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * A proposed standard which has never seen wide adoption, and the developers/proposers of it appear to have now shutdown. While there are a couple of refs in reliable sources ( and ), I don't think these passing references really establish notability.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. SJK (talk) 01:51, 14 May 2016 (UTC)