User talk:Laserlightshow

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Laserlightshow


A tag has been placed on User:Laserlightshow, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be unambiguous advertising that 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 the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.

If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add  on the top of User:Laserlightshow and leave a note on |the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Mean as custard (talk) 07:45, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~. Please add your messages to the bottom of the talk page, or they may be overlooked. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. You had a section called "References", but nothing linked in it. How does NASA or FDA verify anything, they have tens of thousands of web pages between them. Basically, nothing was sourced
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
 * ® is a sure sign you work for the company since no one else would bother
 * Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: shows steady financial growth annually while expanding it's [sic] business model to a global scale... for large scale concert tours, broad-cast {{sic}] television... ® is best known... ® has developed, manufactured and produced a series of innovative... state of the art

You cannot use your main user page for drafts, if you persist with this article draft here. It's clear that you have written this article without looking at any other page to get some idea of how to edit. Please look at Tesco for an example of an acceptable and correctly written page about a company Jimfbleak - talk to me?  13:37, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
 * it's all about what the company sells, little about the company itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
 * the article was created in a single edit without wikilinks or references, and looks as if was copied from an unknown and possibly copyrighted source. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.
 * You have an obvious conflict of interest when editing this article, and you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for the company, that is paid advocacy, a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia on their behalf. Paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice. Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly. Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:    . Please do not edit further until you answer this message.


 * Greetings,
 * I will review carefully all the information you provided. I will answer this question now though as you stated how can the FDA verify? or other Federal agencies, here is a direct link to the FDA with the address and the company name clearly indicated External Link: http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dockets/04v0537/04V-0537-Ack00001-vol1.pdf and can not be edited only by the Federal Government, NASA and TSA also have links to these types of legally verified confirmations as there is further details on the company described in many sections of these websites, although I realize that I did not place the exact link to the correct government page. I'm not paid by the company in any way to place any advertisement, I realize that I need to review the Wikipedia standards more clearly and provide information more clearly with less description of products or services and be more detailed on the company's history and structure. I will read though the rest of your response and comply. There are other NASA related articles that are already have been reviewed by wikipedia Months ago describing more varified links and some are the same as the Tribal Existance Productions Worldwide company article that was deleted and I should not continue editing this page any further until a better understanding on my end is established. The article is verifiable once a more clear understanding of the exact Wikipedia submission process. Thank you for the time and review of the link provided above that answers your question. I greatly appreciate your response and this is my error and I'm glad my other contributions were variable and already have been reviewed and I should review how I created those articles and review my many errors — Preceding unsigned comment added by Laserlightshow (talk • contribs) 18:32, 19 January 2016 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Article
Hello, Laserlightshow. I wanted to let you know that I’m proposing an article that you started, ISS Space Sky Laser, for deletion because I think it has a lot of flaws which will be hard to rectify. If you don't want the article deleted:


 * 1) [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=&action=edit 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.

Double Plus Ungood (talk) 15:52, 8 March 2018‎ (UTC)