User talk:Samg67895

October 2021
Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I wanted to let you know that one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Ridge—has been undone because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thank you. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 11:02, 6 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello Samg67895. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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, broadly construed, 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:Samg67895. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. 331dot (talk) 08:07, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

Several problems
First: welcome to Wikipedia, even though you are currently having a hard time.

Article name: we are an encyclopedia, With more than 6 million articles of general interest. One of these is Ridge. That article name is taken, and you are not allowed to simply replace its contents. There are more than twenty other articles that would like to be named "Ridge": see Ridge (disambiguation). If you were to successfully create an article about your company, you would name it "Ridge (company)" or something else.

Notability: there is only one absolute requirement for an article: the article's subject must be notable by our definition. See WP:N and specifically WP:NCORP. If your company is not notable, we will delete your article even if it is otherwise perfect: See WP:AMOUNT. We delete more than 200 articles every day. Do not put any more effort into this project until you are sure you can demonstrate notability with referenced to reliable sources. This is easy to mess up. See WP:CSMN. I really mean it. We will not permit an article on a non-notable subject to remain in Wikipedia.

Logo copyright: The logo is copyrighted. Basically everything is copyrighted at the time of its creation: no paperwork or registration is needed. Your company (or the logo creator) owns the copyright. The copyright owner may license the copyright to us (and therefore to the whole wide world) under the CC-BY-SA. Alternatively, We can add the logo to the article later under the "fair use" doctrine. We are paranoid about copyright, so our rules about using fair use are highly restrictive, but they generally apply to a single use of a logo in a company's article after the article is accepted, not before. See Logos.

After all that, if you do decide you company meets our notability definition, then don't give up. We can and will help you. -Arch dude (talk) 15:11, 7 October 2021 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently using Wikipedia for promotional purposes, and for attempting to hijack an existing article to turn it into spam for your business. Thinking that it will be acceptable to use Wikipedia for advertising is a common mistake among new editors, and I don't blame anyone who doesn't yet know of Wikipedia's policies for making that mistake, but continuing to do so after being informed of the relevant policy is another matter. On the other hand nobody could reasonably think that it will be acceptable to totally remove an existing article on another subject to make way for an advertisement for their business, and it is difficult to have any respect for anyone who does that, especially if they do it repeatedly. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. JBW (talk) 14:25, 19 October 2021 (UTC)