User talk:OldFrederick

Your username[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. I saw that you edited or created London & Oxford Group, and I noticed that your username, "Londonandoxford", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Foobar Museum of Art". However, you are invited to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you personally, such as "Jack Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people, and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, or website, regardless of your username. Moreover, I recommend that you read our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please create a new account or request a change of username, by completing this form, that complies with our username policy. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for changing your username; I would now highly suggest you review conflict of interest and the paid editing policy; if you are editing as an employee or representative of the company, Wikipedia's Terms of Use require you to state that somewhere, either on this page, your userpage, or on the talk pages of articles that you edit. 331dot (talk) 10:07, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I am an employee of the company yes. I was simply assigned the task to create a wiki page for the company, I have reviewed the COI guide and i will no longer copy and paste sentences from our promotional brochures.

Do you understand that Wikipedia is not a business directory, but an encyclopedia? All articles must be supported with independent reliable sources indicating how the subject is notable. I would highly suggest that if you truly feel the company merits an encyclopedic article, that you visit Articles for Creation where you can submit a page for outside review before posting. As you have a conflict of interest, you should not be directly editing about your company. 331dot (talk) 10:41, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I already said that I understood the COI and anything i say from here will be strictly factual and fully referenced. As for a "reliable source" sure, go look at other companies where they simply reference their own websites. What is stopping me from doing exactly the same thing? I have already stated here yes i am an employee like you asked and now lets move on.

COI is everywhere, be realistic, why would anyone outside of any company waste their time editing someone else's page? Although i won't, but lets be honest what is really stopping me from making another account and editing this page? . This company may be new to wikipedia but it has been operating for 23 years backed with rich history.

How would you qualify when a company merits an encyclopedia article? e.g. why should Blackrock have a wikipedia page? Remove the speedily deletion and let me get on with it.

I'll try to address your comments:

Threatening to sockpuppet is not a good move.
You don't seem to be understanding COI as you still want to directly edit the page. Can you see how it would be problematic for Barack Obama to write his own article? People naturally edit favorably about themselves, even unintentionally. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view, which is hard to do if people edit article subjects they are related to. You ask "why would anyone outside of any company waste their time"; that's what the majority of people do here; edit about subjects they find interesting but are not necessarily involved with.
As I have explained, companies merit articles if it can be demonstrated with independent reliable sources how they meet the company notability guidelines. The company's own website is not a reliable source because they can change it to say whatever they wish. As such, it is not independent. Primary sources can be used to verify certain factual, indisputable information like the company's address or number of employees.
Other things exist; the fact that other similar companies have pages does not automatically mean that yours merits one. Each article is judged on its own merits.
I have explained to you how you can see to it that an article is created about your company; I urge you to do so. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand what you're saying. But let me address your comments:

Sockpuppeting happen all the time. welcome to the internet. nobody is threatening anybody. Relax. Anyone can slap on Tor and proxies and its r.i.p for you. How can you identify who is a legitimate person who are "editing about subjects they find interesting but are not necessarily involved with." The answer is you can't. Just because i'm willing to openly talk about it doesn't mean i'm a internet criminal.

Barack Obama can edit his own page. All he has to do is simply make an account called 331dotreckter and edit his page. Wikipedia requires zero identify verification. Sure he can edit all he want. But the nature of wikipedia is that the public will spot the biased changes and edit it back.

Company do indeed ref themselves, yet you do nothing about those references. I see a couple on blackrock's page alone for example.

That statement was both useless and a waste of time to read. You can't even state the reasons why. Never mind, i'm not here to start a flame war.

I will use the method you suggested to create the page and wait for it to be approved. It makes more sense that way since i will have time to edit before the page gets deleted. I wish i knew about this before I started. Seems like we both wasted each other's time.

It's not a waste of time if it helped you to understand Wikipedia guidelines and practices.

If you see other pages' citations as problematic, you have every right to question them. Just because other people get away with doing something improper doesn't mean that you can.

Yes, it is true that anyone can register any username. But if someone registers the username BarackObama they will be asked for verification(where there is a process for, BTW) and will be blocked if they are impersonating him(which has been done). Sockpuppeting is when people register additional usernames for improper purposes, such as avoiding a block or to remove CSD tags. There are indeed ways to tell this and it is done all the time every day here.

I wish you nothing but the best with your editing; Just be open about your situation and receptive to suggestions. Thank you 331dot (talk) 12:04, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just FYI here a list of notable users with articles. 331dot (talk) 12:18, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Londonandoxford[edit]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Londonandoxford, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages; user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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 "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. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of London & Oxford Group[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on London & Oxford Group, 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 Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "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. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

June 2016[edit]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with London & Oxford Group. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion, which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the article's talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the article. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 10:06, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I don't believe i've deleted anything in the talk page. At best i edited it so i could comment and reply. Am i not using the correct method to reply?

You removed the speedy deletion notice from the article (unintentionally or otherwise); Wikipedia policy is the page creator cannot remove a speedy deletion notice from a page they created. Please read my comment in the top section of this page(below my initial username message) 331dot (talk) 10:28, 17 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]