User talk:Mahdifox

Speedy deletion nomination of Spooler (UTM)
A tag has been placed on Spooler (UTM), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous 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 the guidelines on spam as well as FAQ/Business for more information. 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. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 12:04, 17 March 2010 (UTC)


 * Re your message: The article along with many of your redirects was deleted because the article was promotion for the product and did not establish why the software is notable enough for inclusion on Wikipedia. Please see the Wikipedia's Business' FAQ on what you should and should not do regarding your company or its products. -- Gogo Dodo (talk) 07:10, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

File copyright problem with File:SpoolerStateful.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:SpoolerStateful.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Closedmouth (talk) 14:11, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Use of user talk pages
Please see the talk page guidelines for an idea of the purpose of user talk pages. The user page guidelines are also relevant. The material you have placed here does not belong here, as you will see from reading there. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

March 2010
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:18, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a medium for advertising or promotion. It is quite clear that your only purpose in editing is to promote a particular product. This edit, for example, is blatant advertising. Please stop. JamesBWatson (talk) 15:38, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Promotional redirects
Please do not create redirects that are promotional in nature. Redirects should point to the most relevant article about that topic. For example, you created a redirect from Antiphishing to Spooler (UTM), but the most relevant article to which the redirect should point is actually Phishing. Mind matrix  16:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of اسپولر
A tag has been placed on اسپولر, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a foreign language article that was copied and pasted from another Wikimedia project, or was transwikied out to another project. Please see Translation to learn about requests for, and coordination of, translations from foreign-language Wikipedias into English.

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. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:09, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion notice on your recently-created "redirect"
Hi: a couple of things here:
 * 1) Here on the English-language Wikipedia, all content (including article titles) should be in English. A "redirect" to another language Wikipedia isn't appropriate.
 * 2) If we had a corresponding article about the subject here in en.wikipedia it would have been appropriate to add an interwiki link to that page, but I see the corresponding article has actually been deleted as non-notable promotional material. Please don't add promotional material to Wikipedia - there are plenty of other outlets for marketing online. Gonzonoir (talk) 09:12, 18 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Spooler UTM
A tag has been placed on Spooler UTM requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article 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.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — 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 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 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 - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), 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. noq (talk) 11:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Promotion and conflict of interest
I am responding here to this post to my talk page.

Whether you were aware of it or not, the article was unambiguously promotional, in both its incarnations (Spooler UTM and Spooler (UTM)). You may like to reflect on the fact that four independent users saw it as sufficiently promotional to justify speedy deletion (the two users who tagged it for deletion and the two administrators who deleted it. If you honestly did not see it that way then that is probably because you are so involved in the subject that you cannot see it from the perspective of an outside observer, and do not realise how it looks. This inability to see the promotional character of your own editing is one of the main reasons why Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline strongly discourages anyone from editing on subjects in which they are involved. It is not normally acceptable to write a Wikipedia article about your own company. In addition, even if the article were rewritten in a completely non-promotional way, there is the question of whether the company satisfies Wikipedia's notability standards. If not then any article on it is likely to be deleted: no amount of rewriting will make a non-notable subject notable. To see what is required you may like to look at the general notability guideline, at Notability (organizations and companies), and at FAQ/Organizations. Finally, I have looked back through your editing history, and it is clear that all of your editing has been done with the purpose of promoting your company, even long after you had been told this was not acceptable. If you make any more promotional edits you may be blocked from editing. Please take this as a final warning. JamesBWatson (talk) 19:52, 19 September 2010 (UTC)