User talk:Timhoad

A tag has been placed on King apparel, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. 72.75.73.158 13:57, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

King apparel
A tag has been placed on King apparel, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article seems to be about a person, group of people, band, club, company, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is notable: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not assert the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you feel that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

For guidelines on specific types of articles, you may want to check out our criteria for biographies, for web sites, for bands, or for companies. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Dep. Garcia ( Talk   + |  Help Desk  |  Complaints  ) 15:47, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove speedy deletion tags from articles that you have created yourself. If you do not believe the article deserves to be deleted, then please place  on the page (please do not remove any existing speedy deletion tag) and make your case on the article's. Administrators will look at your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Wildthing61476 15:50, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices. Please use the template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion. Wildthing61476 15:55, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from articles that you have created yourself. If you continue, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Wildthing61476 15:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

King apparel
I have added a "" template to the article King apparel, suggesting that it be deleted according to the proposed deletion process. All contributions are appreciated, but I don't believe it satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and I've explained why in the deletion notice (see also "What Wikipedia is not" and Wikipedia's deletion policy). You may contest the proposed deletion by removing the  notice, but please explain why you disagree with the proposed deletion in your edit summary or on its talk page. Also, please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Even though removing the deletion notice will prevent deletion through the proposed deletion process, the article may still be deleted if it matches any of the speedy deletion criteria or it can be sent to Articles for Deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. Wildthing61476 15:59, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Why your article keeps being deleted
Please read Notability (organizations and companies) and Conflict of interest, and stop recreating articles after they have been deleted ... this repeated behavior will get you blocked from editing ... WP:CSD does not require any discussion or debate ... if an article lacks WP:Attribution, then any editor can tag it with, and then any admin will delete it if they agree ... links to a subject's own website and MySpace pages do not qualify as WP:Reliable sources to satisfy WP:Notability.

Also, learn how to sign your posts, or else they will be ignored ... and note that nobody here will ever contact you by email, so don't post your address again. &mdash;72.75.73.158 16:24, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * That last part was both rude and incorrect ... my apologies. &mdash;72.75.73.158 22:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * 72.75.73.158 basically summed it up. The subject is not notable according to policy, and that's why it was subject to speedy deletion. Nishkid64 (talk)  21:07, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Also, in regards to this comment "also, how do i get a nice box to put my logo in like those guys?", I'm assuming your talking about the signature. Go to preferences at the top of the Wikipedia page (when you're logged in) and there's an option for a signature. Add the appropriate coding to get your desired signature. Nishkid64 (talk)  21:16, 4 May 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, see User talk:Nwilson123 for an example of a user who has been indefinitely blocked for repeatedly recreating a deleted article ... it appeared under three different names, but it was virtually the same text each time, an example of Wikipedia is not for things made up in school one day that got out of hand when it became an obsession. (Couldn't locate it to include in my previous post.) &mdash;72.75.73.158 21:28, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, okay i'm just about to repost the KING Apparel entry. I have amended the entry quite extensively to make it as 'notable' as i can, according to my interpretation of the definition. Please note that i have used the LRG Clothing entry as a template and tried to keep as close to what these guys have done, because they are the closest thing to what we do in our sector.

if there are any problems let me know Tim Timhoad 23:11, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
 * It's not how you're asserting the notability, but whether or not the subject is in fact notable. From my research, I found no reason to keep the article, and no established notability of the clothing line. Nishkid64 (talk)  23:07, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

New references for the article
hi nishkid64,

i just read your reply and appreciate where you are coming from. However, King Apparel's exclusive collaboration with the UK govt on the Want respect campaign has garnered press in over 40 different publications in the last two months, and has been commended by ministers including the current health secretary. I can by all means put you in touch both with the press agents of King Apparel and the Government Want Respect campaign to verify this. From the perspective of this campaign alone i would argue that a credible amount of notability has been achieved. Please let me know if this would assist in any way of rectifying the problems Timhoad 23:23, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
 * Can I see some links of press reports or news items regarding the clothing line? I just need to see that before I restore the article. Nishkid64 (talk)  23:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)

(sorry forgot to title the last post)

Hi Nishkid64,

i have done a quick sweep and provided the following links most of which are news items and/or showcases about the clothing and also its collaboration with Want Respect? There has been a larger volume of published press across titles from One Week to Live, RWD Magazine and ATM to international titles such as Vice and Mens Health, particularly recently on the Want Respect campaign collaboration. Should you require documentation of these i can arrange for the PR company of King 'Canoe Inc' to forward these to you. If you require further information do not hesitate to say. cheers

Wordonthescene News item on the want respect collaboration

HighSnobiety News item on the King MP3 cap

FUKNews item on the Want Respect collaboration

Style DepartmentNews item from Germany previewing the AW06 collection

Month Rag Click through to the showcase to find a brand showcase and interview

Fashion CapitalDesigner profile

Rago MagazineBrand interview

Kingpin European Skateboard Magazine News item for King skate team

Fashion CapitalPress release

Timhoad 00:54, 12 May 2007 (UTC)


 * Hello ... my IP address has changed since my last visit to this Talk page, and didn't look like they needed any further help from me with this, but I feel compelled to comment on the links to "news items and/or showcases" that you have recently provided. (I also took the liberty of adding a new section heading to break this up a bit, reflecting the change in the subject of the discussion.)


 * In general, they do not meet the WP:Reliable sources guideline criteria, i.e.:
 * blogs and webzines are not considered "reliable" because there is no WP:Verifiability of their facts (any anonymous user or staff writer can post practically anything, including original research)
 * Rule of thumb for WP:Attribution:"''If you cannot find an author or a date published on a referenced article, then it is questionable, and hence not reliable."
 * a "press release" and interviews with one of the principals violates the WP:Conflict of interest policy
 * foreign-language links (like, "News item from Germany previewing the AW06 collection") are excluded under WP:EL
 * most of the other links are just advertising promotion (including at least one retail site, if I'm not mistaken)


 * It's not the quantity of the references that matters, it's the quality of them, and links to web pages with little more than pictures of the products marketed by the subject reeks of WP:Vanispamcruftisement.


 * I have no memory of what it looked like when I tagged it for speedy deletion on 2007-05-04 as, but if I saw it today on new pages patrol with only that list of "references" for WP:Attribution, I'd slap a  on it to initiate a CSD (A7) speedy deletion without a second thought, which was apparently what I did ten days ago with a previous version of this article.


 * As a final note, please create a page in your sandbox, e.g., User talk:Timhoad/King Apparel so that other editors can look at it and make suggestions and improvements before you try reposting it ... that way we can show you how to use  templates and avoid duplication of links.


 * BTW, please take a look at some of my "sandbox essays" starting with What to do after your speedy delete has been restored ... I'm actually trying to moderate the speedy deletion process so that it isn't Too Hasty, but I'm afraid that what we have here is a case of "lipstick on a pig" (no matter how hard you try, it will never be WP:N enough for inclusion, and the Senior Partners have already agreed with that opinion since the previous versions were speedy deleted) ... the essays also contain some informative examples of what can happen when a newbie editor refuses to "let it go" and just MOVE ON.


 * Happy Editing! &mdash; 12:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * My reply to your message is on my Talk page, where you left it ... let's keep it there so it doesn't get fragmented. &mdash;68.239.79.82 19:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

-
 * I have restored the article and moved it to King Apparel. Please make any corrections to the article so it doesn't read like an advertisement. Also, you might want to see the corrections I made to the page so that it complies with WP:MOS. All Wikipedia pages need to comply with this policy. Nishkid64 (talk)  20:12, 14 May 2007 (UTC)


 * See also: User talk:68.239.79.82 for reply and continuation of dialog. —68.239.79.82 17:27, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Tagging King Apparel for speedy deletion
Hello ... I encountered this newly created article while performing New Page Patrol or Counter Vandalism Unit activities.

In my opinion it lacks sufficient Attribution to satisfy the Notability criteria for Organizations and Companies ... or perhaps it reads like Vanispmcruftisment, or it may violate Conflict of Interest.

The point is that I plan to tag King Apparel with either a speedy delete tag of  (CSD A7) or a   that explains my concern about why this article fails WP:CORP ... I have created this initial entry on your Talk page because you are either the original author of the article, or one of the most recent editors of it.

I will leave more detailed information regarding my specific concerns about this article on its Discussion page ... please respond either here or there, instead of on my talk page.

Happy Editing! &mdash; 17:33, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Having taken on board the advice received, i have re-written those areas that need citation (i can see and fully understand the concerns regarding these points) and re-written the section regarding king apparel being the first brand to work alongside New Era. This is indeed factual, although the only verifiable evidence of this sits on a contract with the CEO of New Era Europe at their headquarters in Aylesbury, England. I have left this information in, as considering thousands of street clothing brands now use New Era for their headwear production, being a pioneer in this field, lends strength to both the credibility and foresight of King Apparel in the streetwear sector. If there are further concerns please relay them and i will address accordingly. many thanks

Timhoad 21:57, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

June 2020
Hello Timhoad. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to King Apparel, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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. Undisclosed 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 akin to black-hat SEO.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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, broadly construed, 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:Timhoad. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message.   Whisperjanes (talk) 23:13, 29 June 2020 (UTC)


 * FYI - Moved Tim Hoad's paid declaration to his User page. I have no opinion on notability of the deleted article. David notMD (talk) 17:38, 9 September 2020 (UTC)