User talk:Maxormark

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo.casino.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo.casino.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 on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 08:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Smart Live Casino for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smart Live Casino is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smart Live Casino until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. j⚛e decker ^talk 06:47, 9 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable fair use File:Aberdeen International Business Park Phase 1.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Aberdeen International Business Park Phase 1.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item 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 creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media 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 the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

The place is in existence and is not off-limits and there are no freedom of panorama problems. One can go there and produce a free image. Finnusertop (talk | guestbook | contribs) 21:59, 27 August 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Smart Live Casino for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Smart Live Casino is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Smart Live Casino (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. –Roscelese (talk ⋅ contribs) 21:18, 28 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Elektron Data Platform

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 Elektron Data Platform, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. GirthSummit _(blether) 14:28, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure of paid editing

Hello Maxormark. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Maxormark. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Maxormark|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:37, 6 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

My answer is mixed. Some of the edits might be described as paid, some are not. For example, edits to the Refinitiv page were carried out under a client/agency basis, others – including that for Media Image – were not, simply that it's a company that I work for and I wanted to do it. Others still in the past have been pure exercises in editing practice: I was a newspaper sub-editor for the best part of 15 years, and I've done things like improve sentence structure and readability. I note the information here with interest because I was honestly unaware of such stipulations. I will observe them in the future, and will create a "work" account for Paid features. Maxormark (talk) 12:37, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would highly advise that you not create a separate account, as the potential for abuse is great. Wikipedia's policy on using multiple accounts - a practice known here as "sockpuppetry" - is strict. The general rule is "one user, one account". A person should only use one account to edit Wikipedia, so that we can tie an individual's editing history to a single account for their entire lifetime.

As it is impossible for us to know when you are editing under a client/agency relationship and when you're editing "off the clock", I would advise you to declare yourself as a paid editor for any article where you are receiving compensation directly or indirectly from the subject of the article. This transparency will give other editors confidence that you are acting in good faith, and not trying to conceal self-serving motives. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 08:02, 2 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of The Media Image for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Media Image is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Media Image until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. GirthSummit _(blether) 17:44, 7 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]