User talk:Matangor

Welcome!
Hello, Matangor, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Nglish, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Rasel lio (talk) 11:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Nglish


A tag has been placed on Nglish requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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 deleting administrator. Rasel lio (talk) 11:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Rav-Milim


A tag has been placed on Rav-Milim, 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 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 removed 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 deleting administrator. Nat Gertler (talk) 15:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Warning
Hello Matangor,. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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:   .

What the above boils down to is that if you keep mass spamming by creating articles about this company, I will block you indefinitely from editing Jimfbleak - talk to me?  16:03, 1 November 2015 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. First I note that you have not responded to my request to declare your obvious conflict of interest and paid advocacy. Looking at your edits, I think it is obvious that you are either employed by the company or another business working on their behalf, and you must declare that as indicated above or risk being blocked. If you nevertheless deny a COI, and claim you have no particular interest, I'll suggest you leave these articles alone and edit something less controversial.

I'll concentrate on Rav-Milim for now, but they same problems occur in all the deleted articles.
 * you did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines for companies or books. 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 no in-line independent references at all, just two links to the company's website.
 * You were so busy spamming, you omitted to give us any facts about the dictionary at all. To show notability you need independently verifiable sales figures, awards or the like, and for the company you need hard facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: leading online Hebrew dictionary... It is the only Hebrew dictionary that is offering a complete morphological analysis... encompasses the entire modern Hebrew vocabulary... website is an essential tool for anyone writing in Hebrew... the most comprehensive Modern Hebrew dictionary... a world renowned expert... leading lexicologists and language experts participated... novel approach... vast knowledge&mdash; it's a sales leaflet, not an encyclopaedia article.
 * For what it's worth, I just had a quick look at Melingo, and it's just the same; no third-party sources, no actual facts, just spam. Israel’s leading company in online dictionaries... leading company worldwide in computational linguistics of Semitic languages... specializes in bringing to market products and services based on... unique enterprise solutions... unique enterprise solutions. I note that even in your request to me you couldn't resist several honored online dictionaries and language learning tools.
 * 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.

The fact that Encyclopaedia Britannica and Merriam-Webster are notable doesn't in itself make Melingo or its products notable, and we have no actual facts to assess whether they are. The notability of the larger companies certainly doesn't entitle you to write highly promotional articles. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation or its books are notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.

Feel free to contact me if there is anything that needs clarifying Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:59, 2 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Nglish


The article Nglish has been proposed for deletion&#32; because of the following concern:
 * Fails notability requirements for web content. No in depth coverage from independent reliable sources.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on |the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:24, 16 February 2016 (UTC)

This article was edited by Wikipedia formal editor Bearcat back in November. Why should you decide now to delete it? Please leave it as it is. This is a quality Spanish-English dictionary and English learning tool by Britannica and Merriam Webster that definitely has a place to be mentioned here.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.166.42.184 (talk) 07:46, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

Nomination of Nglish for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Nglish is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Nglish until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Crystallizedcarbon (talk) 16:26, 17 February 2016 (UTC)