User talk:Skussmann

April 2020
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. JBW (talk) 19:33, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

How do I get my draft back? Is there a way I can edit it to fit Wikipedias guidelines? I was trying to follow the same format as https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Basket. Please advise. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skussmann (talk • contribs) 20:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)


 * I have restored the draft to give you a chance to improve it.
 * I don't feel that advising new editors on how to improve their draft submissions is one of my strongest points, but I will give you a few comments which I hope may help. You may also like to try asking for advice at Teahouse, which tends to be populated by editors who have more involvement than I do in giving that kind of advice.
 * I'm afraid that in its present form the draft is not at all suitable, as it reads from start to finish as promotional. I will give you two examples of unmistakably promotional sentences. "The vegan diet is the most environmentally conscious diet" is a matter of opinion, as many people don't think so, and Wikipedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and not express opinions. "Bio Raw is ushering a conscious shift in the retail marketplace to promote the availability of vegan food offerings" reads exactly like marketing or PR copy. However, it would be a mistake to leave you with the impression that the problem is just a matter of a few sentences that could easily be rewritten in a non-promotional way: I have selected those two sentences as particularly striking examples, but the whole tone of the draft, from start to finish, is promotional, and it would need a total and radical rewrite to make it acceptable.
 * You will know, but I don't, whether the impression of the draft as being like marketing or PR copy is because you actually work in that area or not. If you don't, then you can no doubt learn to write in ways which are more in line with Wikipedia's requirements. If you do work in that area, however, you may find it much more difficult. People who spend all day, day after day year after year, dealing with marketing-speak can get so accustomed to it that they become desensitised, and sincerely can't see it when it is right in front of them. Experience over the years has shown that a very large proportion of such people really cannot learn to write in a neutral way, even if they try hard to do so, because they have been so deeply programmed to do otherwise. I have seen many such people who clearly genuinely wish to contribute in a neutral way to Wikipedia struggling to do so, and eventually either giving up, discouraged and annoyed, or else find themselves blocked from editing because their efforts are causing too much damage. (That is not even considering the unfortunately large number of people who come here with the deliberate purpose of using Wikipedia as a free advertising service, and have no intention of doing otherwise.) If you don't work in advertising or a related field then this paragraph may be irrelevant to you, but since I don't know, I thought it might be best to warn you of the potential problem.
 * My advice to new editors is that it is best to start by making small improvements to existing articles, rather than creating new articles. That way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't have the discouraging experience of repeatedly seeing hours of work deleted. Gradually, you will get to learn how Wikipedia works, and after a while you will know enough about what is acceptable to be able to write whole new articles without fear that they will be deleted. Over the years I have found that editors who start by making small changes to existing articles and work up from there have a far better chance of having a successful time here than those who jump right into creating new articles from the start. You are, of course, free to take this advice or not, but I would encourage you to seriously consider it. JBW (talk) 21:55, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you James, I appreciate it. I am not in advertising and simply wanted to practice posting a page for a friend. I will take your advice and see what I can do to improve the article so its not promotional. I see your point with some of the sentences being opinions and not facts. Thanks again.

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:BIO RAW


A tag has been placed on Draft:BIO RAW, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the.  Spencer T• C 22:44, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Skussmann/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:Skussmann/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the.  Spencer T• C 22:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Skussmann/sandbox


A tag has been placed on User:Skussmann/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the.  Spencer T• C 20:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Bio Raw Logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Bio Raw Logo.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like (to release all rights),  (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 20:45, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they 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. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.Deb (talk) 12:35, 7 May 2020 (UTC)