User talk:SteveRizzo

Speedy deletion nomination of TheSteveRizzo
Hello SteveRizzo,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged TheSteveRizzo for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Kavdiamanju (talk) 02:56, 8 January 2016 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. Please 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. 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 you, 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 you claims or interviewing your management. Most of your references fail on one or other of those grounds
 * I'm not convinced that you meet our notability criteria anyway, "big in Pennsylvania" doesn't really cut it when everyone claims to be an internet star. Zoella is notable because she attracted mainstream media coverage, not just a few Twitter hits.
 * you gave some references, but they were not in-line so we can't tell what fact each is supporting
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
 * Having an Accomplishments" section is slf-promoting by definition.
 * Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: Social Media Influencer... internationally recognized... which sparked his interest in online broadcasting and content production.


 * You have a conflict of interest when editing this article. 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 and WP:Autobiography.
 * You have an agent and presumably derive an income from your work. 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, or otherwise deriving an income from the subject of your article. Paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice. 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, and if it does not, 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, 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:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:   .

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. You need to be sure that you can meet our notability criteria though Jimfbleak - talk to me?  07:21, 9 January 2016 (UTC)