User talk:Mattepper

Nomination of VAR Technology Finance for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article VAR Technology Finance 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/VAR Technology Finance 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. MER-C 19:41, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Re: email
I do not have to explain to you what an encyclopedia is, nor do I have to explain basic media ethics or the moral bankruptcy and illegality of undisclosed native advertising. Please also see our Terms of Use. Our readers expect independent, unbiased coverage of our subject matter. MER-C 20:33, 28 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of VAR Technology Finance
Hello Mattepper,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged VAR Technology Finance for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:VAR_Technology_Finance&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

SamHolt6 (talk) 00:49, 9 March 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: VAR Technology Finance (March 15)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KJP1 was:

The comment the reviewer left was:

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 User:Mattepper/VAR Technology Finance 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 User:Mattepper/VAR Technology Finance, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and save.
 * 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=User:Mattepper/VAR_Technology_Finance Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:KJP1&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User:Mattepper/VAR_Technology_Finance reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KJP1 (talk) 14:55, 15 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of VAR Technology Finance


A tag has been placed on VAR Technology Finance 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 a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly 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 "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. Largoplazo (talk) 23:40, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of VAR Technology Finance
Hello Mattepper,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged VAR Technology Finance for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:VAR_Technology_Finance&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

SamHolt6 (talk) 23:51, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Disclosure of employment
Hello Mattepper. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to VAR Technology Finance, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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. Undisclosed 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 akin to Black hat SEO.

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, broadly construed, 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:Mattepper. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:51, 29 March 2018 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. Thanks for declaring your paid editor status, which I have moved to your user page per instructions. Note that this declaration does not mean you can write what you like, it just means that you won't be blocked for not declaring your status. Because of repeated recreation, I've prevented direct creation, and you should write as draft. If the draft meets our criteria, the protection can be lifted to enable recreation.

I deleted your article because
 * it did not 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 company, 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 company claims or interviewing its management. 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. Your text was either unsourced or sourced to your CEO talking about the company, not an acceptable source as defined above.


 * As well as not having any proper sources, to show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. You just tell us what you sell and about rebranding, little about the company otherwise. Examples of unsourced or self-sourced claims presented as fact include:  a national [US?} financial services company specializing... provides financing and leasing services for commercial businesses, state and local government, educational institutions and non-profit organizations... celebrated its 30th anniversary in business... providing leasing and financing solutions [plus list of what you sell)
 * The article was deleted after this discussion as recently as 8 March. Your text contains nothing to suggest that the company has suddenly met our notability criteria now when it didn't six weeks ago.

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. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  05:29, 26 April 2018 (UTC)