User talk:Shawngr

Welcome!
Hello, Shawngr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions, especially your edits to Pyrus (software). I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! &mdash;  Masum Ibn Musa  Conversation 13:16, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Reason for G11
Hi,

Can you please advise why my newly created page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pyrus_%28software%29 has been removed from Wikipedia for violation of G11 (advertising and promotion). I was writing it from the neutral point of view and has no intention to make it look like an Ad. How should I edit the on in order to restore the page in Wikipedia?

Shawngr (talk) 08:04, 10 June 2015 (UTC) Shawngr


 * That article largely was a platform for Pyrus' self-representation. Three of the references weren't independent, another looked like a blog to me, and they generally didn't say what they were cited for. Entire sections were based exclusively on Pyrus' website. And I don't think a phrase such as "ensuring ultimate control on the go" shows a neutral point of view. Huon (talk) 15:07, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Help me!
Hmm... I thought that reliable references like gizmodo.com or techcrunch.com have decent authority and value. This is not a self-promotion - I tried to express only neutral point of view. Removed what you suggested and excessive site links. Please review - hopefully it meets all Wikipedia guidelines now. Will also update it with more content soon.

Shawngr (talk) 10:54, 17 June 2015 (UTC)
 * It wasn't the references that were the issue, more the wording of the article. Mdann52 (talk) 16:39, 17 June 2015 (UTC)