User talk:BBPMB

Hello James, you have left me a message on March 24, regarding an existing article on Wikipedia (Tarkett S.A.) which I had rewritten, because it contained outdated and erroneous information. I have edited my article with the help of Tarkett's communication department, which has kindly provided historical data and images for my article and I don't believe that this represents a conflict of interest. I have since reedited my article on my user space and have publicly asked for editing help (see below). As there has been no response, I was wondering whether you would have a minute to look it over and to let me know , whether the new version is acceptable to Wikipedia's terms. Many thanks in advance, BBPMB (talk) 08:42, 4 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have been accused on impartiality regarding the Tarkett article. This was not my intention and I have now revised the article following the instructions provided by Wikipedia help pages (or at least trying to incorporate the requested changes the way I understood them). Could you please have a look at the article in its current format and advise whether it is acceptable or edit it to make it acceptable. Many thanks, BBPMB

Hello Mechamind90, happy to reorganize the page as you suggested, but I don't seem to be able to get to the page where you have moved the new Tarkett page. (i only see the link in the htlm text and can't access the page you moved the content to - maybe because I work on MAC?. Could you provide a URL for this page, if not I work via the undo button to make the changes and then have you take another look when it's done. Best regards, BBPMB

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:BBPMB/Tarkett mechamind 9 0 01:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

All Tarkett images depicting flooring in real projects realized by Tarkett are fully owned by Tarkett S.A., Nanterre - France and granted to be used on the respective Tarkett page on Wikipedia

Hello Mechamind90, I have taken the liberty to rewrite the existing Tarkett page, as the provided information was totally out of date and no longer accurate. I strongly believe that the updated version fully respects Wikepedia's code of ethics and does only provide facts of potentially general interest. As I joined the Wikipedia editing world only recently, please indicate to me if this is not the case and point out those passages to me which might need to be reformulated to match Wikipedia's spirit. I'll be glad to do so. Best regards, BBPMB

March 2011

Hello BBPMB. If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Tarkett, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. mechamind 9 0 17:08, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The "inside our Group" string was a ticket to the Conflict of Interest noticeboard. mechamind 9 0 17:27, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You're still welcome to edit pages unrelated to Tarkett. That should generally help an editing reputation. mechamind 9 0 17:55, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not going to revert on the Tarkett article anymore. In the event of a conflict of interest, I'm going to see if someone else will. You wait and see if someone will revert back. That's probably the only obvious solution at this time. mechamind 9 0 22:37, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Tarkett_Vinyl_Home_L.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Tarkett_Vinyl_Home_L.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Melesse (talk) 03:53, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Now that the Tarkett article has been deleted, are you still seeking to keep File:Tarkett Vinyl Home L.jpg? If so, please clarify: Does Tarkett license this image under a free license? If so, please identify which specific free license and provide evidence that it has been so licensed. If on the other hand you propose to use the image under fair use, I’m sorry, but as a matter of policy Wikipedia does not permit hosting of a non-free image if it could be replaced by a free image. —teb728 t c 00:18, 25 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Moved to userspace.

I have moved your version of the Tarkett page to a draft space on this linked page. This time it is not because of a possible conflict of interest, but because of manual of style.

The lists in your version need to be organized into lines.
There appear to be sentence fragments.
Each list may need a proper introduction.

Just remember:

Whether or not the information is correct, inclusion of this information still needs to be encyclopedic.
You will want a review from an extraordinary experienced editor or an administrator to verify neutrality.

Note that I have added colons before each image name because it is currently outside the article space, and you probably don't want to get pestered by a bot to avoid using non-free images outside the article space. mechamind 9 0 16:30, 22 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ownership of articles

I see that at User talk:Mechamind90 you wrote "The new Tarkett page has been posted on behalf of Tarkett S.A. in France. Please do no longer intervene on this page directly as it is from now on centrally managed from inside our Group." There are several problems here. Firstly, individual editors do not own Wikipedia articles, and no individual editor has the right to instruct others not to edit an article, or to restrict their editing in any specified way. Secondly, the fact that you are editing on behalf of the company means, as has been explained above, that you have a conflict of interest, and Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline strongly discourages you from editing the article. If you wish to have a page about the company which is under the control of the company, and can be restricted to containing just what the company wants it to contain, then you should post elsewhere, such as on the company's own web site. Wikipedia is not the place to do so. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:55, 24 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Tarkett Group Headquarter.jpg

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 File:Tarkett Group Headquarter.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.

If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hang on}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion, or "db", tag; if no such tag exists, then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hang-on tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page 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 page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ukexpat (talk) 19:54, 28 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tarkett Group Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tarkett Group Logo.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. We hope (talk) 18:05, 29 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, BBPMB. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 14:16, 30 March 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Reply to your request for me to comment on your draft article about Tarkett

The main thrust of my earlier message was about ownership of articles, though I did also remind you of the conflict of interest issue which had already been mentioned to you. Every time that you edit Wikipedia a note is shown (admittedly in rather small print) saying "If you do not want your writing to be edited, used, and redistributed at will, then do not submit it here."

Looking fairly briefly at your draft, the main doubt that comes to mind is about notability. The article does not indicate that its subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability criteria. I have searched for information about the company, and most of what I have found is from the company's own web site or other non-independent sources. If the subject does not satisfy Wikipedia's notability guidelines then no amount of rewriting of the article will change the subject from a non-notable one to a notable one. The article is still also somewhat promotional in tone, though perhaps less so than the previous version. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:11, 5 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tarkett

For personal reasons I have less time to spend on Wikipedia just now than usually, and I have not got round to assessing your work on User:BBPMB/Tarkett, which you asked me to do. I would prefer to wait until I have time to look at it properly than to do a rushed and poor-quality job, so i hope you can bear to wait a while. I may mange to do it in the next few days, but I may not. If I haven't got back to you by say 10 days from now then please ask me again, to make sure I don't forget it. JamesBWatson (talk) 20:12, 3 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Tarkett

many thanks for your reply. Please take your time, there's no rush. Best, BBPMB — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2011‎ BBPMB (talk • contribs) 06:47, 5 September

I am still not fully convinced that the references you cite really establish notability, as many of them seem to be promotional pages. However, in my opinion it is no longer in danger of being speedily deleted as promotion, since it does not look like blatant advertising, as earlier versions of the article did. If it were the subject of a deletion discussion it might or might not get deleted: it would depend on whether the participants in the discussion thought your references were good enough. I have had a quick look around for better sources, and what you have posted is at least as good as anything I found, so I am not able to offer anything better. To me they are neither obviously more than adequate not obviously nowhere near adequate. You can try reposting it as an article if you like, and see whether it gets accepted. JamesBWatson (talk) 09:00, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

James, thanks a million for your quick return. I'll give it a shot tonight. Best, BBPMB (talk) 14:21, 13 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your article has been moved to AfC space

Hi! I would like to inform you that the Articles for Creation submission which was previously located here: User:BBPMB/Tarkett has been moved to Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Tarkett, this move was made automatically and doesn't affect your article, if you have any questions please ask on my talk page! Have a nice day. ArticlesForCreationBot (talk) 12:09, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Tarkett, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see what needs to be done to bring it to the next level.
Please continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping Wikipedia!

Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:01, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Tarkett

The article Tarkett has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

After being tagged for over three years, this is still written as an advertisement. All but 4 of the references are either dead links or pages that don't mention Tarkett, and the only significant coverage is in industry promotion sites.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Drm310 (talk) 19:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Tarkett organization logo.gif

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Tarkett organization logo.gif. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 18:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: User:BBPMB/sandbox (June 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

.

To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

FireflySixtySeven (talk) 16:50, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, User:BBPMB/sandbox

Hello BBPMB. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "sandbox".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code: {{subst:Refund/G13|User:BBPMB/sandbox}}, paste it in the edit box at this link, click "Save page", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. TKK! bark with me! 19:35, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]