User talk:Nazanin.Jafarinezhad

Draft:Opeartion Mercy
Hello, Nazanin. Looking to answer your question at the Help Desk (though somebody else answered it before me) I was looking at your draft Draft:Opeartion Mercy, and I thought it might be helpful to tell you that, unfortunately, this draft is nothing at all like a Wikipedia article. Please be aware that nobody owns a Wikipedia article. If Operation Mercy meets the criteria for notability, there may be an article on it, but it will be a Wikipedia article about the organisation: the words "we" and "our" are almost always inappropriate. Furthermore, Wikipedia articles should be based entirely on reliable published sources, and nearly all on sources unconnected with the subject. Please have a look at your first article. If you have any connection with Operation Mercy yourself, you should also read conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 10:53, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Opeartion Mercy


A tag has been placed on Draft:Opeartion Mercy requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.mercy.se/en/about-us/our-roots. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website or image but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

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.  Eye snore  (pc) 15:32, 22 June 2015 (UTC)

Copyright, notability, COI
I have deleted your submission. Wikipedia cannot hold copyright material, not even in sandboxes or AfC submission pages, not even temporarily. Please read Copy-paste. Assertion of permission to use is not enough, a formal copyright release is necessary.

Even if the copyright issue were resolved, material copied from elsewhere is likely to be written in a promotional tone unsuitable for an encyclopedia article, which requires a neutral point of view. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a place for organizations to tell the world about themselves, even if they are good causes. See User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard.

Article subjects need to have notability, which is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by references showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." There is good advice on how to write an acceptable article at WP:Your first article.

If you are connected with the organization, please read the guideline WP:Conflict of interest and the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. JohnCD (talk) 16:20, 22 June 2015 (UTC)