User talk:Rob.dip
Welcome
[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 IProd - Integrated management of product heterogeneous data 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Monty845 14:10, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Continuation of discussion from deleted talk page
[edit]- Just because a document is available for free online does not mean that Wikipedia has the legal right to use it. What is needed is a license from whoever owns the copyright, permitting free reuse of the material in a way that is compatible with the Wikipedia licensing structure. Regarding the deletion, when you submit the required information to OTRS, they can simply undelete the article. Still, I'm worried that the material may need a re-write to comply with article guidelines. Monty845 14:54, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for continuing out of the deleted page. I'll meet all consortium members next week and discuss agreement to publish on Wikipedia according to Wikipedia licenses, although this has to go through the legal offices of each partner and may take time - probably to know something that we all agree upon. Anyhow, if this is needed, I'll undertake it. Once this is granted, what do you think needs to be corrected/improved to comply with article guidelines? Thanks! Rob.dip (talk) 14:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- The article should read as if it was written by a neutral third party, who has no interest in promoting the subject of the article, just providing a coverage of the subject that you would expect to find in an encyclopedia, as opposed to a directory, business listing, or advertisement. The article should also contain references (preferably inline citations, see WP:REFB) to independent reliable sources (see: WP:RS) that support what is being said about the subject. This serves two purposes, it allows verification of what is being claimed about the subject, and it shows that the subject is notable enough to justify an article (see: WP:ORG and WP:GNG). The version that was deleted seemed more a promotional listing of what the organization hopes to do then a neutral coverage of the subject. Monty845 15:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for the useful indications. I'll forward your comments to the partners and we'll setup a small team to provide Wikipedia the necessary content. We do have a list of 85 papers/publications that we can add, so finding the most relevant one is not a problem. Thanks! Rob.dip (talk) 15:47, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- The article should read as if it was written by a neutral third party, who has no interest in promoting the subject of the article, just providing a coverage of the subject that you would expect to find in an encyclopedia, as opposed to a directory, business listing, or advertisement. The article should also contain references (preferably inline citations, see WP:REFB) to independent reliable sources (see: WP:RS) that support what is being said about the subject. This serves two purposes, it allows verification of what is being claimed about the subject, and it shows that the subject is notable enough to justify an article (see: WP:ORG and WP:GNG). The version that was deleted seemed more a promotional listing of what the organization hopes to do then a neutral coverage of the subject. Monty845 15:18, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
- Thanks for continuing out of the deleted page. I'll meet all consortium members next week and discuss agreement to publish on Wikipedia according to Wikipedia licenses, although this has to go through the legal offices of each partner and may take time - probably to know something that we all agree upon. Anyhow, if this is needed, I'll undertake it. Once this is granted, what do you think needs to be corrected/improved to comply with article guidelines? Thanks! Rob.dip (talk) 14:57, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Speedy deletion nomination of User:Rob.dip
[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 User:Rob.dip 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
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, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, 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. Guillaume2303 (talk) 16:47, 30 November 2011 (UTC)
- Hi Guillaume2003! What is the reason for speedy deletion? Content of this page is temporary and should not be visible to others, am I wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.116.197.98 (talk) 18:32, 30 November 2011 (UTC)