User talk:Cristalzelda
This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Vital Verlic, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.openad.net/dynastatic/sell/en/sell-about20.php. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and 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 and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on OpenAd, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read our the guidelines on spam as well as the Wikipedia:Business' FAQ for more information.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Mayalld (talk) 13:51, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Openad, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam.
If you can indicate why the subject of this article is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the article 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 help make it encyclopedic, as well as adding any citations from reliable sources to ensure that the article will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. StephenBuxton (talk) 14:12, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
Notability of Katarina Skoberne
[edit]A tag has been placed on Katarina Skoberne requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article appears to be about a real person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), 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 indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable. If this is the first page that you have created, then you should read the guide to writing your first article.
If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the article's talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. 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. StephenBuxton (talk) 14:14, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
I have nominated Openad, an article you created, for deletion. I do not feel that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Openad. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Mayalld (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)
January 2008
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. It would be appreciated if you would not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Openad. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. —slakr\ talk / 09:50, 7 January 2008 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, adding content without citing a reliable source, as you did to Openad, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. This is especially important when dealing with biographies of living people, but applies to all Wikipedia articles. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are already familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add your original reference to the article. Thank you. Mayalld (talk) 13:26, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
Openad
[edit]Wikipedia's conflict of interest policy is intended to address issues of individuals who are "too close" to a subject from editing articles about themselves or in entities in which they have a personal interest, thus ensuring that neutral and verifiable articles can be created. I have already edited the Openad article, added multiple sources as references and cleaned up the article to meet Wikipedia standards, which was enough to establish consensus that the article was not an advertisement and was a notable subject worthy of inclusion. Your updating the article risks violating the WP:COI policy under any circumstances, but modifying details of the formatting and making changes not supported by independent sources only aggravates the problem. I am more than happy to assist in editing this article, as I have already done, and i will keep an eye on it through my watchlist. I strongly encourage you to read the WP:COI policy to gain a better understanding of the issues that have been raised here. You may be better off suggesting changes on the article's talk page rather than editing the article directly. Alansohn (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2008 (UTC)