User talk:Russollini

Speedy deletion nomination of TradeHub International
Hello Russollini,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged TradeHub International for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can 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. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 06:28, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Hello Russollini. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. 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. 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. 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, 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:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:38, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Reply
It's not quite as simple as that, even when you have declares an interest
 * you need to 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 (other than hard facts), 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.
 * it's all about what the company organisation does, little about the company itself, not even a country or headquarters. To show notability you also need hard facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits. Not all your sources met those criteria
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of inadequately sourced claims or promotion presented as fact include: '' started to assist companies with their international needs... its Founder and President Anthony Russo believed that all companies, despite their size, had the ability to enter the international market place... one of the larger importers of Hydrofluoric Acid... has been helping Mexican Companies.
 * Not a reason for deletion, but you need to have wikilinks to other articles, such as hydrofluoric acid

Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)