User talk:Tomas.pagirys

Welcome!
Hello, Tomas.pagirys, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Aciety, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Speedy deletion nomination of Aciety


A tag has been placed on Aciety, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page 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. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:22, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Your question about Aciety
Hi. Regarding your inquiry,

"Hi, It would be fantastic to gain some feedback about the details which would make Aciety entry into wikipedia valuable to the readers. Yes, we acknowledge that we are a private company. Yet, we have some novelties and contributions to local communities like 1) being the first to successfully execute crowd-funding in Lithuania 2) building the whole network for a specific industry (as opposed to being an ordinary company within the value chain) 3) unique way we approach a general industry problem (counterintuitively we remove bidding to ensure the best providers are motivated to be on the network). Would you say these elements and the whole story be worthy the inclusion into the encyclopedia? We thought we could start by building a page similar to these: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SoftServe https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Levi9_Ukrainehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software_MacKiev Without any doubts we are planning to update our page."

The last two words are the crux of the problem: "our page". There is no ownership of pages on Wikipedia, and it is expressly not a place for any person or group to use as a form of Web presence, as a means of attracting attention. Editing by users with a conflict of interest is strongly discouraged. Wikipedia isn't a web host, and you'd have to keep in mind that anybody can edit a page you created. Article topics need to be notable, as defined in Wikipedia's guidelines, and that notability needs to be established through recognition in reliable sources that are independent of the topic. So an article can't take the form of you communicating your own thoughts to readers. It needs to convey what has already been written elsewhere in said independent sources. So, for example, if the basis for Aciety's significance involves crowdfunding, the industry-specificity of the network, etc., then there would need to be such sources that are already talking about that. —Largo Plazo (talk) 11:52, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Hello, Indeed, thanks a lot for your time and quick answer. I am starting to feel the real vibe of wikipedia! I agree with you that it should be others talking about us. That is why more than 50% of the content in Aciety description were quotes. May you explain me why people cannot use quotes from credible sources as external opinions and as a basis of the content? I borrowed this concept from [|oDesk's] wikipedia page. Would making the quotations more than 75% of the content make it as a third party review from your perspective? We have more than 10 sources like The Next Web, Arctic Startup and three major media journals in Lithuania (two of them are among top-10 visitor's sites in Lithuania). I know that it's not a big number, yet I found so many wiki pages even without them ([|MacKiev]). Would you be so kind and gave me a couple of tips of how we can make it a real 3rd party review and worthy inclusion into the encyclopedia? Sure anyone would be able to edit it. I would owe you a digital favor :) Tomas.pagirys (talk) 12:23, 21 April 2015 (UTC)tomas.pagirys (talk)


 * I think you'll understand that picking quotes favorable to you from people who didn't craft them to be encyclopedic isn't the same thing as people with no direct interest, of their own volition, coming to Wikipedia to write an article! Especially if you're picking them for their "opinions", in your words, given that what Wikipedia calls for is facts. —Largo Plazo (talk) 12:50, 21 April 2015 (UTC)