User talk:LCT Michael

Welcome!
Hello, LCT Michael, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as LC Technology International, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, 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, followed by your question, 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 Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 04:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
 * Starting an article
 * 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 LC Technology International


A tag has been placed on LC Technology International requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Dori ☾Talk ⁘ Contribs☽ 04:27, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Explanation
Let me explain further: A Wikipedia article needs to be written like an encyclopedia article, not a press release. --do not praise the company or the product. Do not use the second person "you" --that's appropriate for an advertisement, but not an encyclopedia Remember not to  copy from a web site, even your own -- first it's a copyright violation, but, even if you own the copyright and are willing to give us permission according to WP:DCM, the tone will not be encyclopedic and the material will not be suitable--as was the case here. (Thus, there is generally no purpose in giving permission; it is better to rewrite.)

Include only material that would be of interest to a general reader coming across the mention of the subject and wanting the sort of information that would be found in an encyclopedia. Do not include material that would be of interest only to those associated with the subject, or to prospective users--that sort of content is considered promotional.

Additionally, a Wikipedia article needs to show notability with references providing substantial coverage from 3rd party independent published reliable sources, print or online, but not blogs or press releases, or material derived from press releases. For products, a substantial independent product review in an independent journal is usually a good reference.

As a general rule, a suitable page will be best written by someone without Conflict of Interest; it's not impossible to do it properly with a conflict of interest or as a paid press agent, but it's relatively more difficult: you are automatically thinking in terms of what the subject wishes to communicate to the public, but an uninvolved person will think in terms of what the public might wish to know. And keep in mind that the goal of an encyclopedia is to say things in a concise manner, which is not the style of  press releases or  web sites, which are usually more expansive.

If you think you can do it right according to our guidelines, and if you have the third party sources, do so, but expect the article to be carefully checked for objectivity. Otherwise, as suggested, use the Articles for Creation process.

For further information see our FAQ about business, organizations, and articles like this and also WP:FIRST.

''However, since the name you have used includes or refers to the subject of the article, you must choose another username. ''As explained in WP:USER, only individuals may edit. When you have a username that is or includes the name of your organization, you imply that you are editing officially, and have a superior right to edit the page. But that is not the way WP works--all editors are considered equal--and your contributions like those of any editor must be justified by sources. I'm sure you do not intend to give such impression, but that's why we have the rule. Therefore, please choose another name. On that user   page, you should say whom you are working for.

Proposed deletion of Filerecovery
Hello, LCT Michael. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, Filerecovery, for deletion because I don't think it meets our criteria for inclusion. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) edit the page
 * 2) remove the text that looks like this:
 * 3) save the page

Also, be sure to explain why you think the article should be kept in your edit summary or on the article's talk page. If you don't do so, it may be deleted later anyway.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks, Danielj27052705 (talk) 14:43, 17 October 2012 (UTC)


 * The deletion has been removed for time for you to address matters but please try to amend these quickly unless another editor may do the same as me... Danielj27052705 (talk) 15:24, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of FILERECOVERY Data Recovery Software


The article FILERECOVERY Data Recovery Software has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Non-notable software, as far as I can tell. I'm not finding substantial independent coverage via Google, .

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. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:17, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

````LCT Michael I am still in the process of updating the page. I will be adding in press releases to the product, and other sources. Will that be sufficient for substantial independent coverage?

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, LCT Michael. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article FILERECOVERY Data Recovery Software, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
 * instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. AllyD (talk) 18:18, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a sales catalog
Sorry, but it's inappropriate to treat Wikipedia like a sales catalog, by listing purchasing options and prices, for example. See WP:NOTCATALOG. —Largo Plazo (talk) 18:25, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * If I may, this software vendor lists their software on their page, and they list prices. How is this different from what I was doing. Just want to know how what I was doing was any different. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_Recovery_Wizard LCT Michael (talk) 18:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)LCT Michael


 * I don't know whether or not it was different. I do know that it was in conflict with the guidelines. Many articles have content that is in conflict with Wikipedia's guidelines and are subject to editing to bring them into compliance. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:01, 29 February 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, about your comment that "this software vendor lists their software on their page": Hopefully, this vendor isn't listing anything on "their" page, and everything on it was written by someone independent of the vendor. See the message already posted above for your benefit about conflicts of interest. People who write about their own companies very frequently find the articles they posted deleted because their promotional tone is evident to everyone but them or because they don't meet the notability guidelines. In many other cases, the creators are dismayed by the extent to which others have edited the articles to bring them into compliance. —Largo Plazo (talk) 19:06, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of FILERECOVERY Data Recovery Software


Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, introducing inappropriate pages, such as FILERECOVERY Data Recovery Software, is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Under section G3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, the page has been nominated for deletion.

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. Ethanlu121 (talk) 16:29, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

March 2016
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to introduce inappropriate pages to Wikipedia, as you did at FILERECOVERY Data Recovery Software, you may be blocked from editing. If you need guidance on how to create appropriate pages, try using the Article Wizard. Ethanlu121 (talk) 16:31, 2 March 2016 (UTC)


 * I see no reason why the article would obviously have been a hoax. If it was, then the above comments are appropriate, but otherwise they aren't. —Largo Plazo (talk) 17:12, 2 March 2016 (UTC)