User talk:SongCloud

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. (music) (people) (software) (academics) It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, as defined in the link, or they will be deleted. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, press releases, 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. Although you gave some references, most were not adequate,since they appeared to be posted by or on behalf of the company. Not a factor for deletion, but it's not good practice to use bare urls for ref
 * it's all about what the company organisation sells, little about the company itself other than its location (a place I've stayed incidentally). To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, sales, cost of company acquisition, turnover or profits. For all you tell us, you could be three people in a single room
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Apart from a list of take-overs, the entire content is a shopping list of what you sell. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include:  provide high-speed satellite-based Internet to airlines... provides airlines with high-speed Internet communications services... wholly-owned and licensed media content... installed on aircraft worldwide
 * You have a conflict of interest when editing this article, thank you for declaring your interest. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
 * Since you work for the company, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:    . Please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block.
 * Although you appear to claim that you have written the article, the history shows no edits by you to it. If you are using multiple accounts, you need to take care. It's permitted, but any suggestion that it is being used inappropriately will lead to a block on editing
 * It's not the worse I've seen, and if you want to try again, I'll post the deleted text to a user subpage for you to work on, just let me know, but please make the required COI declaration first. You don't have to use fancy reference templates, either use the reFill tool in your preferences (gadgets tab), or just for web refs or  for books etc will do.

If you want to reply, you can do so on my talk page. You can alternatively leave a message on this page, and I will know you have done so if you start it with my user name, User:Jimfbleak and sign it with four tildes ~ when you post it. Jimfbleak (talk) 06:02, 10 August 2016 (UTC)