User talk:Marcusandteam

 This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing,  because it has been used to evade blocks on another account, and because you have continued the promotional editing which led to the block on that account. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock on the talk page of your original account. JBW (talk) 20:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) Yes, indeed, about the company you work for.
 * 2) Yes, indeed, it "talks" about how wonderful the company is, in glowing terms. JBW (talk) 20:09, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * How are we expected to talk about the company? Much of the information stated is written in the vernacular of the company and the industry it is a part of.
 * What would we do to remove our "advertising tendencies", despite the article not once trying to sell the company to anyone?
 * Is it expected that someone who has NO correlation or connection to put out information that could possibly be false or negative, mind you.
 * It is a 501(c)(3) non-profit. so what is there TO advertise? These events are to help veterans and active-military, there is no gain for the company. Is that so wrong? Marcusandteam (talk) 20:23, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Why is our article different from that of AFWERX? AFWERX is in the same government entity as SOFWERX and the article is formatted in a similar way. Marcusandteam (talk) 20:59, 25 January 2024 (UTC)


 * 1) For some reason many new editors assume that Wikipedia's prohibition on promotion applies only to promotion for commercial gain. It doesn't: it applies to any kind of promotion.
 * 2) The page you wrote was in unambiguous marketing-speak from start to finish. It was written to promote a good image of the subject it was about, to persuade readers of the article that the organisation is noble and beneficial. That is what the organisation's own web site is for if it has one, or its Facebook account, or any one of many other actual or potential promotional web sites it may use. However, that is not what Wikipedia is for: Wikipedia's aim is to present subjects from a neutral point of view, as recorded in independent, third party sources.
 * 3) Thank you for calling attention to the article AFWERX. I have checked it, and although it wasn't within 1,000 miles of being such blatant marketing material as the page you created, you were perfectly right in pointing out that it too was promotional for Wikipedia, so I have deleted it. If you know of any other articles which are just as bad, then please let us know. JBW (talk) 22:30, 25 January 2024 (UTC)