User talk:Swimmingguy123

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  13:26, 12 June 2016 (UTC)


 * I saw this in passing, and I've done the rename for you. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 16:28, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Comment
Hi, thanks for email. I deleted your article because
 * the article was a copyright violation of the website. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines.  Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, 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.
 * References should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting
 * You have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. 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.
 * You cannot use a user name which represents an organisation or product, which is why I blocked you. I actually used the wrong tag, I didn't intend to block you for spam, just for the user name, which is why I've accepted your request so quickly Jimfbleak - talk to me?  16:24, 12 June 2016 (UTC)