User talk:Cendyn

Cendyn

First off, do not ever redirect userspace to article space.

Secondly, your article has been deleted speedily as spam. Do not recreate the article, corporate vanity is not tolerated on Wikipedia. Teke^(talk) 22:15, 2 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I deleted the copy that you placed in your userspace. Do not continue to recreate the article, or you may be blocked for spamming without further warning. Teke^(talk) 02:26, 6 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a problem with my talk page, tell me and I might remove the message myself. As it is, it is impolite to mess with another user's talk page. Teke^(talk) 20:18, 8 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hotel Internet Marketing

A tag has been placed on Hotel Internet Marketing, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. Please see Wikipedia:Stub for our minimum information standards for short articles. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.

Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. If you plan to expand the article, you can request that administrators wait a while for you to add contextual material. To do this, affix the template {{hangon}} to the page and state your intention on the article's talk page. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 16:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

In response to your message on my talk page:

Hi Angus my name is Gina and I just placed a small article about Hotel Internet Marketing in Wikipedia. It has no promotional hype, just a definition of what Hotel Internet Marketing is and how Hotel entrepreneurs have expanded with internet use. I’m not sure why it has been tagged for speedy deletions and as far as I can see has already been deleted. Are you considering it spam or is it to short? I’ve looked through many Wikipedia articles some are longer but others are just as short. I understand that Cendyn in the past may have not followed your guide lines but I can assure you that will not happen again. Your procedures are a little confusing to me but I am trying to follow the requirements to the letter. Do you have some kind of template that I can view as to how an article should be submitted? I've already read your rules and I don't see what I am doing wrong. Thanks, Gina

Hey Gina. I personally wasn't the one that flagged what was presumably your first version of the article as spam and so cannot possibly account for that — although I would note that, assuming the text was similar to when I saw it, I personally believe that the editor who did so was wrong to flag it as such. It will have been deleted as, usually, when something is tagged for speedy deletion, it actually is done fairly speedily.

I don't personally think that the article was spam. When I flagged it for delete, as can be seen from my message above (incidentally, that message is a pre-written message produced using a template by inserting something like {{subst:empty-warn|ARTICLENAME|header=1}} into the page), it was because the article provided little or no context. In explanation, it's not so much that you were doing something 'bad'; rather that the article seemed to make little sense (to me) and was written in such a manner that it seemed like it might have been an accidental creation, orphaned from a main article.

I can't really give a lot of advice (having only written/created exactly one article from scratch) on how to avoid this. However, I would say that it's maybe worth taking a look at a few existing articles (particularly those listed as being of Featured Article quality; these represent the best that Wikipedia has to offer and can largely be regarded as being 'finished' or 'complete' articles) to get an idea on general style and the structure of an article (a basic structure is usually a paragraph or two of an introduction to the basic topic — often little more than a dictionary definition, or a definition in laymen's terms for technical topics — followed by a few further sections to expand on specific areas or elements of the subject). Also be aware that not all topics will be notable or worthy of an encyclopaedia article. In this particular case, I'm not certain as I couldn't deduce enough from the article when it was present.

In closing I will say that I'll post the welcome template below for a couple reasons: it's great to see that you're here with the intent of contributing genuinely to Wikipedia but also because it contains links to a few handy guides to help you get started. Also, if you haven't had a look at Wikipedia Help already, it might be worth doing so. There are various items there to help new editors cut their teeth, including schemes like Adopt-a-User if that's your kind of thing. And finally (for real this time!) I would point out that there's very probably nothing personal in articles you create being tagged for deletion or with some other tag (such as one indicating need for 'wikification', or a need for being brought in better conformance with the Wikipedia Manual of Style). A number of editors, myself included, simply sit watching and refreshing Recent Changes and New Pages, looking at edits as they appear in the list and looking for anything that looks like poor or misguided editing (or simply editing from inexperienced users, as appears to have been the issue in this case) or vandalism. We look at the article, often making a judgement within a few seconds before taking appropriate action, if necessary.

I hope this helped any concerns you may have had, and perhaps it even(!) addressed your questions. Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 21:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned above, the welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, Cendyn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Angus Lepper^{(T, C, D)} 21:09, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Lansdowne Resort

A tag has been placed on Lansdowne Resort, 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 page 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. Corvus cornix 21:00, 23 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To begin with, it has been clearly established that you are part of the SEO attempt to use Wikipedia for advertising purposes. That's not allowed. Secondly, please read WP:INN. Just because something exists which nobody has gotten around to looking at to see if it might be an ad, doesn't mean that you can write an ad, too. Corvus cornix 16:49, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

In case you've forgotten or not looked closely, here is a simple explanation of the conflict of interest policy:

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing 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,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

Accounts used solely for blatant self-promotion may be blocked indefinitely without further warning.

For more details, please read the Conflict of Interest guideline. Thank you. --Ronz 17:03, 24 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]