User talk:Eagleofthenorth

Hello, Eagleofthenorth. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you.--Srleffler (talk) 05:37, 4 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Duma Optronics

I want to restore the page "Duma Optronics". As the admin who initiated its deletion, can you please notify me what are the necessary changes that need to be made? I have read the rules of Wikipedia and haven't found a conflict. Thank you The Bushranger (talk)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Eagleofthenorth (talk • contribs) 08:52, 28 December 2015‎

Hi Eagleofthenorth. If you want to leave a message for The Bushranger, you should leave it on his talk page. He may not see it on your talk page, since you don't have an active conversation going on with him here. Sign messages by ending them with your name, not the name of the person you are addressing. You can insert your name and a timestamp by typing "--~~~~". The Wiki software will fill in your name and the date for you when you save the edit.

The answer to the question of why the page was deleted is here. More specifically, the article was not found to satisfy the requirements of Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies).--Srleffler (talk) 08:21, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Duma Optronics

Hello Eagleofthenorth,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged Duma Optronics for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 13:47, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duma Optronics

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Duma Optronics, and it appears to include material copied directly from http://deletionpedia.org/en/Duma_Optronics.

It is possible that the bot was mistaken and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article. The article will be reviewed to determine if there are any copyright issues.

If substantial content is duplicated and it is not public domain or available under a compatible license, it will be deleted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material. You may use such publications as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.) CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:48, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The bot has made an error here. Deletionpedia is clearly a Wikipedia mirror site, so the text should not have been taken to be a copyright violation. I sent a note to the bot operator asking them to fix this problem. If the text was substantially the same as the deleted version, though, the deletion was proper. When an article has gone through the AFD process and been deleted, you cannot simply recreate it as it was. Any admin who sees the recreated article will delete it on sight.

If you really think you can address the problems that caused the article to be deleted, you could go through Wikipedia:Articles for creation, which allows you to submit a draft and get help getting it ready for publication. Keep in mind that since you work for Duma Optronics, you have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article once it goes live. Think carefully about whether you actually want an article on your company. If Wikipedia has an article about you, you will have no control over what that article says. Sometimes it's better not to be included.

If you need the original text of the article as a starting point for an improved draft, ask an Admin. They can recover the deleted text and send it to you.--Srleffler (talk) 19:01, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned on my talk page, Deletionpedia is actually a very problematic source and does need to be tagged and checked by humans: it copies articles without the complete history and so violates the original authors' copyrights. Copies of that copy don't get better. Rather than copy text from Deletionpedia (which is never proper), one should instead simply request undeletion through the proper channels or (probably better, since the original was deleted) simply recreate it from scratch. — Coren ^(talk) 19:30, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I replied on your talk page.--Srleffler (talk) 06:11, 12 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Duma Optronics

I suggest you to create a draft an article and then submit if for experienced editors for review to avoid multiple deletions. Arthistorian1977 (talk) 14:28, 11 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]