User talk:Leapeiron

JACOS
A proposed deletion template has been added to the article JACOS, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but this article may not satisfy Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and the deletion notice should explain why (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. If you agree with the deletion of the article, and you are the only person who has made substantial edits to the page, please add  to the top of JACOS. Nsevs •  Talk  21:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi, Leapeiron. I tried to fix the problems in this article and I definitely oppose the deletion. Actually you made good start for newbie. I am sure you will learn all important WP policies quickly. Just keep in mind that inline citation of secondary sources is a corner stone of editing articles about companies, organizations and persons. I also suggest to avoid using copy-paste from other websites, because it usually will cause a copyrights problem. Simple rewording could be the best solution. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Once more, welcome and good editing.Beagel (talk) 11:19, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

March 2008
If you have a close connection to 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 from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing 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;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam);
 * and you must always:
 * 1) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Conflict of Interest. Nsevs •  Talk  21:01, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

AfD nomination of JACOS
I have nominated JACOS, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Articles for deletion/JACOS. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Nsevs •  Talk  21:12, 13 March 2008 (UTC)
 * But, please don't delete the AfD template from the page. An administrator will make a final review before deleting the page, and if the notability guidelines have been met, the page will be kept. Thanks. -- Nsevs •  Talk  12:06, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for contacting me
Hay, let me take a quick look and see what I can help you with. you may want to look at my talk page at the bottom at ShamanDhia's section, I am currently engaged in a simler discussion with her, however I will look at the AFD (article for deletion page) and see what I can clear up for you.Coffeepusher (talk) 21:46, 13 March 2008 (UTC)


 * ok, here are some thoughts and experience that I can share with you. First off, you didn't recieve a welcome template...I will take care of this for you.  It contains a collection of links that tell you all about wikipedia policies and give advise on editing and creating articles.  Secondly, I am really sorry that your first experience with wikipedia policies is a AFD review...Mine was that I pissed off some guy on the Alcoholics Anonymous article that caused a "screaming match" between the two of us for a few days...but AFD reviews are brutal, especially when it is your creation that is up for deletion.  Ok, on to your article.
 * The reason your article was nominated was twofold. First the corperation doesn't appear to be notable.  understand that notable dosn't mean it isn't important, it just means that it hasn't caught the publics attention.  The criteria for notablility is found in the blue link that is in the explination for why the page was nominated (on the AFD page).  Basicly it boils down to is there enough WP:RS (reliable secondary sources) that have talked about this company (press relieces don't count).  usually I do a Copernic or Google search to get a good feel of wether there are enough sources (there isn't any set number, but if it is less than say 5 or 10...I usally don't think it is notable).  additionaly those sources usually have to tell about some event, or somthing that has captured the public eye.
 * The second reason your article was nominated was because it appears to be an advertisement for the company. it tells alot about the inner workings of the company, and its future plans but nothing about events that have recieved media attention, catastrophys, law suits, etc.  this is also the reason you recieved a WP:COI (conflict of interest) notice that appeared on your talk page.  you have more information about this company than the average writer, and more than your sources provide.  Now I am not saying that you work for them, I am only telling you the reason you got that notice.
 * now that beeing said, You arn't in trouble and no one is trying to ban you from wikipedia. although you feel like you are under attack right now we do want you to continue contributing to wikipedia (yah, I know...funny way of showing it...right?) but it is true.  I don't know if your article will stay.  if you think it is notable, then add some secondary sources (sources not published by the company or press relieces) from reliable sources to the article.  tell the human interest side of the company, are they involved in any notable scandals? Did they have any significant press coverage over an action?  add that to the article.  all that beeing said, It may still not stand.  in that case, I encourage you to review Wikipedia policies, and contribute to other articles of interest to you.  read the talk pages, and get a feel of where the other editors have been taking those articles, and what areas of the article are under the most scrutiny.  get a feel for the policies, particpate in the behind the sceans work.
 * Again thank you for contacting me, and if you have any questions, feel free to contact me.Coffeepusher (talk) 22:26, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in this edit to JACOS. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Thanks. Smokizzy (talk) 21:04, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * ok, I just saw the revert on your secondary sources section. to explain, Secondary sources need to be incorperated into the body of the work, see WP:FOOTNOTE to see how this is done.  just puting in articles at the bottom of the page won't stand up, however if you place it in context in the body of the article with the referance next to it then it works.  Check out Public sphere to see what I am talking about.  it is an article that I worked on, and I know it has over 30 referance notes so you can see how it is done.Coffeepusher (talk) 21:17, 14 March 2008 (UTC)


 * I know you've been frustrated by the progress on the article, and I really do believe your sources are deserving. Some of them were repetitions of the same wire article, and one was a paid-subscription site, but I've restored the rest. However, I'm still not convinced that the notability guidelines in WP:CORP are met. However, I'm only one voice, and the others in the AfD will continue to debate the issue. You can still continue to improve the article, as Coffeepusher mentioned, by adding footnotes. Let me know if you have any questions.-- Nsevs •  Talk  21:36, 14 March 2008 (UTC)