User talk:Socialmedia2011

Welcome
Welcome!

Hello, Socialmedia2011, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

Angel.com
Someone has located the article - it was "Angel.com" and I have userfied it for you to User:Socialmedia2011/Angel.com. Because it was recreated several times in 2009, this title was salted - protected from creation - by user, so his permission will be needed before the article can be restored to the main space.

It seems from your user page and your conversations with Phearson that you are willing to learn and are approaching Wikipedia in the right spirit, but I should like to emphasise that the Wikipedia community is extremely resistant to the encyclopedia being used for any kind of promotion, and is deeply suspicious of paid editing of any kind. As long as you suggest changes rather than make yourself, declare your interest, and don't push, you should find people helpful - see WP:BESTCOI. The main difficulty professional PR people seem to have is that they are unable to switch off a promotional style and to avoid "peacock terms". (Last month someone told me "This is written with no promotional tone" about his article which included "phenomenally successful... obsessive and extensive knowledge of fashion design... revered for his rare ability... an arbiter of taste... his inventive images... ") You should imagine a hostile critic looking over your shoulder saying, at every claim you make, "Who says so? Can you prove it?" and need to make a positive effort to put out of your mind any idea that you are writing for your client. You are writing for Wikipedia, about your client, from outside.

WP:Corporations and the Community and WP:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide are worth reading carefully. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 20:44, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you sooo much for the help. It's way more important for us to have an accurate page up at all than it is to have a page that's written the way we want it, and we're very careful about making sure our clients understand this too. That's why I was seeking the help of a paid editor who understands the nuances of all this rather than trying to just do it myself. I know enough about Wikipedia to know that I don't know enough about Wikipedia to tackle this by myself. I actually first contacted Phearson because I didn't even know if I'd be able to edit a page on the behalf of someone at all.


 * The person who set this up originally was [[|Kazuwiki] but as that page shows, it seems he no longer exists.


 * I'm really really new at this, so if you wouldn't mind providing some assistance, how would you suggest I proceed? Suggest changes on the user page? Head straight to to talk to him about permission to restore the salted page?


 * As you can tell by even the company page title being Angel.com, which Angel doesn't use anymore, Angel has changed significantly (and grown considerably larger) since the last article was up. So I'll definitely be suggesting a lot of edits.


 * And I can see I've got quite a reading list, so I'll get crankin!


 * 12.167.132.26 (talk) 21:16, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * So as if to prove my point about how much of a Wiki-idiot I am, I couldn't even link to Kazuwiki (the last editor) correctly. It meant to link here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Kazuwiki, but it only shows that it's broken so not a big deal.


 * I also forgot to log in before I edited. Here's the real signature!
 * Socialmedia2011 (talk) 21:19, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * On talk page conversations, the convention is to use indenting to make clear where a new contribution starts, by putting colon characters at the start of paragraphs. I have done that for your last. More for your reading list (that you may have read already):
 * WP:Cheatsheet for wiki markup, and Help:Wiki markup for more detail
 * WP:Your first article and WP:Writing better articles
 * As long as the draft is in your user space, there is no reason you should not edit it directly. It is when the question arises of moving it back to the encyclopedia that you need to be careful, declaring your interest and checking with Chase-me-ladies. If the company has a new name, it could go back with a new title, but you shouldn't use that to dodge the protection on the old title - still check. Ask Phearson for comments on your draft - I haven't time to get deeply into this one. You can also ask for comments by posting at WP:Requests for feedback - response time not guaranteed, they are all volunteers like everyone here.
 * One comment on the article, which I glanced at while userfying it - as someone not familiar with the field I was left not entirely sure what the company actually does. You should try to explain so that the general reader understands.
 * Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:55, 27 October 2011 (UTC)


 * I know that this can be overwhelming, but understand that we are just trying to protect the wikipedia. Allow me to add my two cents: WP:PEW Phearson (talk) 22:43, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks JohnCD and Phearson ! I'm getting cracking. Socialmedia2011 (talk) 15:40, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion
Just as a suggestion, try writing as if you are writing a research paper, and follow WP:MOS. Phearson (talk) 04:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Will do. Can't count on remembering everything in that manual on a first try but I'll do my best!
 * Socialmedia2011 (talk) 18:30, 4 November 2011 (UTC)


 * I've edited the page, it's here: User:Socialmedia2011/Angel.com. Any feedback is welcomed! Socialmedia2011 (talk) 19:50, 11 November 2011 (UTC)
 * Requested AfC on your behalf. If submission is successful it will be created in mainspace. Phearson (talk) 21:07, 11 November 2011 (UTC)


 * Great! I think I'll actually take the mention of patents out as it seems a little ridiculous to link separately to the page for each one of them. Thanks so much for the help! Socialmedia2011 (talk) 21:45, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Your article has been moved to AfC space
Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:Socialmedia2011/Angel.com has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Angel.com, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 21:15, 11 November 2011 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation
From User talk:Phearson in regards to your AfC, it was a success. Phearson (talk) 01:18, 12 November 2011 (UTC)  Angel Incorporated, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. Thank you for helping Wikipedia! Alpha_Quadrant   (talk)  00:35, 12 November 2011 (UTC)
 * The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
 * Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider
 * Awesome! Thank you so much! Socialmedia2011 (talk) 15:23, 14 November 2011 (UTC)

OrderUp
I have undeleted WP:Articles for creation/OrderUp. I agree with Kafziel, though, that the draft's tone is unduly promotional; in particular I'd say the repeated use of "allows" in the services section reads like something straight from their PR department. Also, the draft is rather short on hard facts such as revenues, the number of employees or the number of franchisees. That would be more important than details on what their mobile app looks like. Huon (talk) 22:25, 9 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Thanks so much for the feedback! I deleted some of the instances of "allows," I had not realized the repetition. I tightened up the part on the mobile app, and also added the number of sites (which has grown since the last publication that listed it, but that's the best that's out there). There aren't any recent sources that point to revenue or number of employees, whereas the mobile app garnished a lot of independent, national coverage. I'm a bit confused about the message that said that OrderUp does not meet notability requirements, as OrderUp has significant coverage from multiple national independent sources, as well as a lot of local and regional coverage. I'd really appreciate it if you could take another look, and thanks so much for undeleting the article. Socialmedia2011 (talk) 16:46, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: OrderUp (December 9)
 Thank you for your recent submission to Articles for Creation. Your article submission has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please view your submission to see the comments left by the reviewer. You are welcome to edit the submission to address the issues raised, and resubmit if you feel they have been resolved.
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [ Articles for creation help desk], or on the [ . Please remember to link to the submission!
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.
 * Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Hasteur (talk) 22:30, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

howdy
Hello Tracy, looks like OrderUp is definitely wikiNotable to me. I can try and help you fix up the WP:TONE so that the article is neutral, if you like. Please leave a message on my talkpage when you have time. Sorry about the rough time you are having with pushback from a few of the other wikipedians here... they are hyperconscious and worried nowadays, because of recent events, which have nothing to do with you. Please accept my apologies; they are acting in good faith, but that doesn't mean they are correct on the merits, this time around. And while I'm here, thanks for improving wikipedia, it's appreciated. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 16:58, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Talkback, left you a note on my page. Mostly to say I'm swamped.  :-)    But also with some advice that may be useful, whilst I get myself unswamped.  HTH. 74.192.84.101 (talk) 18:33, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: OrderUp (June 16)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved. ''' Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! '''
 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/OrderUp.
 * To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:Socialmedia2011 Articles for creation help desk], or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Lor&action=edit&section=new reviewer's talk page].
 * Please remember to link to the submission!

Lor Chat 03:46, 16 June 2014 (UTC)
 * You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Your submission at AfC OrderUp was accepted
 OrderUp, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Fiddle  Faddle  12:14, 26 June 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=User_talk:Socialmedia2011 help desk] .
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

License tagging for File:Orderup logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Orderup logo.png. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 18:05, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Orderup logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Orderup logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. ShakespeareFan00 (talk) 18:58, 28 August 2021 (UTC)