User talk:Mkrc01

December 2015
Hello, I'm Ronz. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. See also WP:COI in case it might apply. --Ronz (talk) 18:55, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Promotion vs. Reference?
Thanks for responding. You wrote:

Can you please help me understand why certain references (e.g., for books, or products or courses) are considered to be legitimate, and why some of them are considered to be a promotion? How do I distinguish between the two? Why an article or book on Amazon can be referenced not as a promotion, and why an online course on Udemy would be a considered a promotion?

E.g., For example, see a reference [1] in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lean_Startup?

It's a very good question, and I wish the answer were simple. To start, sources need to be reliable. In the case of your edit, some of the links weren't references as defined within Wikipedia but rather external links.

As far as distinguishing between references and promtion, there are some rules of thumb: Most sources in an article should be secondary, and the exceptions are limited. Some material is simply inappropriate for an encyclopedia article because of it's very nature, or because it can only be attributed to a very small and limited point of view.

I hope that at least begins to answer your question. --Ronz (talk) 20:03, 21 December 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of OfficeFLO


A tag has been placed on OfficeFLO, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or 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. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. GPL93 (talk) 21:12, 20 March 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Entrespace for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Entrespace 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/Entrespace until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. Celestina007 (talk) 22:51, 12 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Many thanks for your message. The post references an article in Daily Finance, one of the fastest growing online finance, crypto and fintech magazines, published by Fupping Media (which also publishes Welp Magazine, Best Startup UK, The Startup Pill and other publications). The referenced Daily Finance article highlights results of their research on management consulting firms in the greater Hartford, CT area - listing top 10 firms they identified, which includes Entrespace - the topic of the Wikipedia post. The Daily Finance article is written by a professional writer, a reporter at DF media, Tenner Smith, with experience in financial intelligence and automated intelligence. There is no conflict of interest, given that there is no relationship between the staff of Daily Finance magazine, its publisher, and Entrespace management consulting firm. So if you have any specific concerns or suggestions, I would be interested to hear. Mkrc01 (talk) 01:14, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

The article was deleted, and yet you just recreated it--some of the fluff is gone, but what was left was one single sentence saying something about patents: there was no credible claim of notability. I strongly suggest you read WP:FIRST--and that you have a look at some more decent articles on Wikipedia to get an idea of what an actual article should look like. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 00:07, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Just a question. Are you suggesting that a patent issued by the US Patent Office is not considered notable by Wikipedia? Thank you.
 * No. It does not matter; the question is not applicable. Drmies (talk) 02:56, 22 September 2021 (UTC)