User talk:Tagraleigh

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * Welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Manual of Style


 * Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or sock puppetry.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome!

Filament Twill Technology
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Filament Twill Technology, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://www.safetycomponents.com/Ask-the-Experts/Filament-Twill-Technology-FDIC-2014/.

It is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 16:21, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Filament Twill Technology


A tag has been placed on Filament Twill Technology, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which articles can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Business for more information.
 * It appears to be a clear copyright infringement of http://www.safetycomponents.com/FTT/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Requesting copyright permission. However, even if you use one of these processes to release copyrighted material to Wikipedia, it still needs to comply with the other policies and guidelines to be eligible for inclusion. If you would like any assistance with this, you can ask a question at the help desk.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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. Sarahj2107 (talk) 16:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

In case the article gets deleted before you read the talk page
I wrote this on the talk page for your Filament Twill article:
 * You haven't addressed the promotion issue. The article reads like an advertisement, using words like "better" "amazing" "dominate" "revolutionize" "enhances" "improved" "excellent" with no references to any reliable sources. Most of your sources appear to be marketing copy or other promotional material. --Richard Yin (talk) 17:15, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Talkback
Never mind, the article was deleted. I had a message for the author on the article's talk page that I assume is unread. Would you be willing to post it here or otherwise retrieve it? --Richard Yin (talk) 20:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Forget that. Basically, you brought up 3 things: the strength of Kevlar being represented on Wikipedia as 5 times that of steel (and what you said was a lack of qualification), a question whether certain lab results could be used as reliable sources, and what you saw as a common-sense observation that the properties of the material would make a good garment.
 * Assuming that's a good description of your comment (and please correct me if it's not, I don't have it on hand):
 * The Kevlar article specifies the strength being measured as tensile strength to weight ratio
 * If the sources can reasonably be described as "reliable, third-party, published sources with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy"


 * you should be fine.
 * Drawing a conclusion (such as that the material makes a better garment) from sources that do not make that conclusion themselves is frowned upon under this policy.
 * --Richard Yin (talk) 20:21, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I just added all the necessary sources to support claims such as "more comfortable PPE is more likely to be worn" [] and removed a most of the ambiguous text that brought concern with unsupported phrases. I'm new with this and simply trying my best to help spread knowledge. It's impossible to keep revising the page to meet the qualifications of Wikipedia if the article is deleted, a total bummer. The article was just deleted again. I don't even work for the company that makes these products, I work in the fire service industry to help spread the knowledge of innovation. That being said I can only work with the information that's currently out there.

It's a total bummer that the individual consistently deleting the article seems to be on a power trip — makes me wonder if companies are paying this individual to post/remove items. It's impossible to understand how the most revised post was immediately deleted AFTER supporting articles/references/studies were added.Tagraleigh (talk) 20:29, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * You can put in a request for undeletion here. If I can comment on your request between you filing it and it being responded to I'll recommend that it be restored as a draft so that you have more time to work on it. --Richard Yin (talk) 20:53, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
 * Incidentally, if I were you I would avoid using phrases like "power trip" when referring to other editors. --Richard Yin (talk) 20:57, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback. The other editor simply didn't have enough time to read the article and deleted it without reading the changes — I spent a lot of time and effort trying to gather all of the proper information and additional resources that weren't available through any manufacturers literature. It's frustrating that individual wouldn't give me the courtesy, like you are, in reviewing the edits. Hence, someone used his or her "power" to deal with the situation, not logic, reason, or consideration. Tagraleigh (talk) 21:32, 30 October 2014 (UTC)