User talk:Mti inc

The article MTI, Inc. has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group or service and which is unlikely to be suitable for an article (or at best would need a fundamentally rewrite). Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended or used for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully.

Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but it is considered inappropriate for such groups to use Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.

Probably not. See WP:FAQ/Organization for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, or organization. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.
 * Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

You are still welcome to write about something other than your company or organization. If you do intend to make useful contributions on some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:
 * What can I do now?


 * Add the text on your user talk page.
 * Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
 * Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, please see how to appeal a block. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:52, 13 August 2010 (UTC)

Okay, let me get this straight. You blocked this page JUST because the user name was a company name and in your eyes that means the whole thing is advertising or promotional--no matter how the content actually READS? Please point out to me what in the content of that article was advertising. Give me specific examples. I could have used my own name to make the account. Would that have made any difference? I'm just writing about the company MTI.

So what then of the page for the company Midmark? They aren't advertising? They speak of their products, have links to their web sites, etc., yet no one seems to think they are advertising? What do you think they are on Wiki for? It certainly isn't just to tell everyone of their history. They want people to follow those links to their web site. If anyone is advertising, they are.

If my user name needs to be something different, then here:
 * First off, please read our guide to unblock requests, most especially WP:NOTTHEM. Second, can you read up on coiq and indicate that you understand it? Magog the Ogre (talk) 18:07, 9 December 2010 (UTC)


 * For the moment the block is still on hold. As you still want to post the same article again there are still some concerns. First is that the article as you posted it had no reliable sources attached, just a link to the company's own website. The company website is ok for verification of the more basic facts, but in order to demonstrate that this is a notable company some independent, reliable sources will be needed. Also, if you can't see how language like "Jeff Baker's 25 years of knowing customers needs and desires, provided the perfect foundation for his company" could be seen as promotional and contrary to the neutral point of view expected of an encyclopedia then that is going to be an ongoing problem. Lastly, an easier to fix problem, we don't use ®, or ™, or other copyright or trademark notices in articles. If you are still intent on writing on this subject, it would be helpful if you could post a draft version of a new article on the subject that addresses these concerns. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:26, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll certainly agree to unblock if you agree to posting a draft in your userspace first. I recommend going through articles for creation first actually. It's not that we don't want you as a valuable contributor, or do not want a good article. Frankly it's just that as administrators, we've all noticed a clear pattern of users creating bad overly-promotional articles, even after being unblocked and agreeing to write carefully. As such we might act like a pain, but we want to make sure everything goes according to plan. Magog the Ogre (talk) 19:45, 10 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Given the lack of reply to these concerns I have removed the hold on the unblock, you can consider it declined until such time as these concerns have been addressed. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)