User talk:Rolah

Speedy deletion of ADVANCE Newsmagazines
A tag has been placed on ADVANCE Newsmagazines 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 person or group of people, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 13:21, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of ADVANCE For Long Term Care Management
A tag has been placed on ADVANCE For Long Term Care Management, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Business' FAQ for more information.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding  to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the article does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that a copy be emailed to you. Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 20:22, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Speedy Deletion Flagging Bully?
Kind sir, this is my second entry that you have flagged today. If I didn't know better I might think that you are picking on me. Please read my profile info and carefully re-read the entries that I have submitted and tell me if you honestly think I am submitting non-objective "promotional/advertising" content. I welcome your response and I admire your commitment to this community venture. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolah (talk • contribs) 20:35, 15 May 2008 (UTC)


 * You are correct in this case. The speedy deletion tag placed on the currect version of the article was an incorrectly a G10 one which signals advertising page. Instead the article should have been tagged as an A7, Not notable page. In order for an article to be on Wikipedia there has to be some form of Notability. As the article makes no claim as to why it is notable (Why it should be discussed inside an encyclopedia) it has been tagged for removal.


 * in order to make it notable, please have a look at the notability guideline. Most times the easiest way to meet this guideline is to add three secondary information sources as references. Secondary information sources are third party publications of substantional size that discuss the subject of the article. Good examples of secondary sources are newspapers such as the New York Times, Major broadcasters such as CNN or websites such as Wired.com. Alternatively modifications can be made that make some kind of claim to importance such as the magazine being the largest in the UK (For example).


 * Also please know that i never single out and tag articles. In fact i am not aware that i tagged the article twice; Im tagging a few 100 articles each day, which means that i dont specifically remember each and everyone of them unless they stand out in some way (Most times thats a bad thing).


 * With kind regards, Excirial ( Talk, Contribs ) 20:46, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam);
 * and you must always:
 * 1) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Conflict of Interest. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  21:01, 15 May 2008 (UTC)