User talk:Zhygi

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. SwisterTwister  talk  15:14, 31 August 2017 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. Note that after your last edit a bot removed the images because they did not appear to be be licensed appropriately, I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide adequate 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 organisation, press releases, 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 organisation claims or interviewing its management. You gave some references at the end of your article, but they were not in-line so we can't tell what fact each is supporting. Some of your refs appeared to be press releases or interviews with you management rather than gebuine third-party sources, and most were rather local. Notable in Calgary isn't enough, you need to show national significance
 * it's all about what the organisation claims to do, little about the organisation itself. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, funding or expenditure.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: ''The Centre helps new immigrants to identify and reach settlement goals... a full suit [sic] of cost-free programs and services that help newcomers settle in Calgary...  Students improve their ability to read, write, listen and speak... helps to learn more about...&mdash; and so on. The whole article has lots of claims, no indication of how the outcomes have been independently validated.
 * there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. Nor should you decide to put the organisation's initials in every heading, contra WP:MOS
 * the article was largely created in a single edit without wikilinks or references, and looks as if was copied from an unknown and possibly copyrighted source. 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. The copied site was marked  . We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial but there is no indication that the copied site allows free use. Text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. 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.
 * If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. In particular, if you work directly or indirectly for the organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, 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:    . If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

The fact that other articles have not been deleted doesn't help you, either they met the criteria or should be deleted as well. See other stuff exists. I've nominated the CCIS for a deletion discussion.

Before attempting to write an article again, please check that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and ensure that you can find independent third party sources to support real facts, not your opinions or unverifiable claims of what the organisation achieves. Also read this important guidance. You must also reply to the COI request above Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:01, 8 September 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright
Hello Zhygi! Your additions to Alberta Securities Commission have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.


 * You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
 * Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
 * We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. To be used on Wikipedia, all other images must be made available under a free and open copyright license that allows commercial and derivative reuse.
 * If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into either the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Donating copyrighted materials.
 * Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps described at Copying within Wikipedia. See also Help:Translation.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. DanCherek (talk) 22:12, 7 July 2021 (UTC)