User talk:Martynasni

Your submission at Articles for creation: Veleza (October 27)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by K.e.coffman were:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Veleza and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Veleza, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Veleza Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:K.e.coffman&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Veleza reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

K.e.coffman (talk) 21:54, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Veleza


A tag has been placed on Draft:Veleza, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:51, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

COI
You have an obvious conflict of interest and you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, 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:   . If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

Also read the following regarding writing an article
 * you must 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 organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, 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 organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls
 * The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:
 * significant coverage in
 * independent,
 * multiple,
 * reliable,
 * secondary sources.
 * Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.


 * you must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
 * there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
 * you must not copy text from elsewhere. 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. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. 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.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. You must also reply to the COI request above Jimfbleak - talk to me?  07:17, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

More
Thanks for your message. Some further points
 * You don't appear to have made the mandatory declaration of your obvious COI, as requested above
 * You said It would be great to get a bit more time for editing before speedy deletion... It ouwld be great to hear your suggestions before deletion.. Speedy deletion is exactly that, for articles that make little or no attempt to comply with our rules. There are deletion procedures involving discussion, but they are intended for where notability or referencing are the main issues, rather than promotion. You should also note that I didn't block you as an undeclared COI editor, as I might have done.
 * You said I'm ready to rewrite the article from neutral standpoint. We believe people deserve to know actual facts about the service. The two sentences are contradictory. It's not a matter of people "deserving to know", it's a matter of you wanting to tell them in for your business interests.
 * Your article was largely unreferenced, and of the references you did give most were not independent third-party sources. If you read the notability criteria above, you can't meet the notability criteria unless you provide proper references.
 * You are so intent on describing your product that you don't give us any basic information about the company, such as where its offices are, the number of staff, or its income or profits. You do make claims such as enabling over 20,000 salons and spas... appointments with 10 million people every year but the first item is sourced to an affiliate, not an independent source, and the second is plucked out of thin air.
 * as always with this sort of article, you list claimed awards, but these don't appear to be particularly notable and don't have their own articles.

If I restore the text, since it was deleted even as a draft it will have to be as an edited version, with the worse of the promo removed. Before I even think about doing that though, you must declare your COI in the prescribed manner, and check that you can actually show notability with genuine independent. No rush with that, I'm tied up with WP:TFA scheduling at the moment Jimfbleak - talk to me?  14:05, 9 December 2018 (UTC)

Sandbox
I've restored an edited version of your text at User:Martynasni/Veleza. I made these edits, please don't restore any of the changes, which are basically some despamming. You still need to address all the other issues regarding referencing and notability that I've previously mentioned.

I suggest that you take an off-line copy, the article could still be deleted even in the sandbox. I think you may face an up-hill struggle to get this to a satisfactory standard, but you have a chance to try. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  07:24, 10 December 2018 (UTC)