User talk:Surendra.viact.ai

Welcome!

Hello, Surendra.viact.ai, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:ViAct, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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 have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 331dot (talk) 09:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion of Draft:ViAct

If this was the first article that you 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.

The page Draft:ViAct has been speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This was done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

Please do not recreate the material without addressing these concerns, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If you think this page should not have been deleted for this reason, or you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Need your help. I just want to save my job by creating this page which a task assigned by my boss. Please help :( Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 09:45, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

August 2022

Hello Surendra.viact.ai. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:Surendra.viact.ai. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Surendra.viact.ai|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. 331dot (talk) 09:31, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are editing at the request of your CEO, the Wikipedia Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing disclosure. Please see the instructions in my message above this one. This disclosure is mandatory. You should also read about conflict of interest.

You and your CEO seem to have a common, fundamental misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not a directory of business, and is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves. This is not a place to merely document the existence of a business; this is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, called notability. Any article about your business must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the business, showing how it meets the special definition of a notable business. Not every business merits a Wikipedia article, even within the same field- it depends on the sources. Acceptable sources do not include things like staff interviews, the company website, press releases, announcements of routine business activities, brief mentions, or other primary sources. It is strongly advised(though not forbidden) that you not attempt to write about your business- but if you choose to, you must set aside everything you know about it and all materials put out by your company, and only write based on the content of independent sources. That is usually very difficult for people in your position to do. The best indicator of notability is when independent editors wholly unconnected with your company take note of reliable sources that discuss it and choose on their own to write about it.

Also be aware that even if you succeeded in getting a draft article about your company accepted, you would no longer be able to directly edit it afterwards, and would be limited to edit requests. You cannot prevent others from editing the article(unless there is a demonstratable problem like vandalism) or lock it to what your company might prefer that it say. Any information about your company, good or bad, can be in an article about it as long as it appears in an independent reliable source. Other editors could vandalize the article about your company and while it would be removed, others could see it first and it could make its way around the internet. These are good reasons to not want an article(see this link as well). Feel free to show your CEO this message. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

We have so many credible sources mentioning about the brand like the one with Forbes https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbesasiateam/2022/08/29/forbes-asia-100-to-watch-2022/?sh=54f2dc72df33

Also, we do not have conflict of interest as I am representative of brand also not paid to do so.

Do you think we can be allowed as it is not meant for brand promotion or directory submission but more of telling about the brand which is Alibaba Funded. Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 09:58, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Telling about the brand" is promotional, at least on Wikipedia. You also seem to misunderstand what conflict of interest is(please read WP:COI). If you represent the brand, that is indeed the definition of a conflict of interest. If you work for the company and/or your CEO, that is considered paid editing. You do not have to be specifically paid to make edits. 331dot (talk) 10:01, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The Forbes piece you link to is precisely the brief mention that is not acceptable for establishing notability. Sources to summarize in any article about your company must have in depth coverage, provided by the source on its own without prompting by the company or based on materials from the company(like interviews). 331dot (talk) 10:03, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Buddy! That is what I am trying to convey in case I am not paid to do so. Could you be bit empathetic and allow me? I can only request. Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:04, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So you don't work for the company? 331dot (talk) 10:07, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't work for the company but we are using the solution in SOCAM Development Limited

https://sg.finance.yahoo.com/news/mou-signing-socam-viact-join-080000013.html

SOCAM Development Limited is an investment holding company. The Company, along with its subsidiaries, is principally engaged in property development and investment, asset management, construction and contracting, renovation and fitting out, and investment holding. The Company operates in three segments. https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E7%91%9E%E5%AE%89%E5%BB%BA%E6%A5%AD Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:11, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I can share more on this:

Funding News by TechCrunch: https://techcrunch.com/2021/03/24/hong-kong-based-viact-raises-2m-for-its-automated-construction-monitoring-platform/

Success Story by AutoDesk: https://forge.autodesk.com/customer-stories/viact

Global Top Company with Hitachi: https://reports.valuates.com/market-reports/QYRE-Auto-1M11776/global-construction-safety-monitoring-systems

Top Safety Tech Brand: https://www.constructiondive.com/news/safety-tech-boosts-productivity-contractors-say-/629826/ Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:08, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not allowed by policy to say why(though it wasn't hard to find), but I believe you are attempting to mislead us. You clearly work for the company(which you included in your username) which makes you a paid editor. You also referred to "my CEO". I will give you one more chance to make the required disclosure and be honest with us.

None of these sources you have provided are acceptable for establishing the notability of your company. 331dot (talk) 10:16, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My CEO is referred as my vendor CEO. viAct I used because the same username and email I use to deploy their solution in construction projects we are working on.

I am not sure why not acceptable to prove credibility because none of them are interview or promotion.

Also, I have one TV interview which includes our project also where we are using viAct solution https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bckh7c3K2O0 Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:22, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

"Funding News" in an announcement of a routine business activity(the raising of capital). "Success story" is a promotional piece that seems to be based on comments by the CEO. The other two sources seem to be brief mentions, if the company is mentioned at all. You aren't editing for the CEO out of the goodness of your heart for free. So, to be clear, are you declining to make the Terms of Use required paid editing disclosure? 331dot (talk) 10:29, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I agree with you that no one does it for goodness or for free. I am doing it because liked the solution and being provided discount on solution. Then, he asked for testimonial so better I create Wiki page in return. Thats what the thought is!

I can give you 100s of more proof but can not change your made up mind! Can request only :(

SOSV: https://sosv.com/company/viactai/

CEMEX Ventures: https://www.cemexventures.com/projects/viact-ai/ Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:37, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

331dot (talk) 10:38, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for being polite? :( Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:44, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you being polite, but you don't get rewarded for basic courtesy- and it's not polite to attempt to mislead us. To be unblocked, please make a request as instructed. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How do you decide misleading without the facts? Isn't it not rude? Because, I don't have way to raise complaint against that. Nevermind! God sees. Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:50, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have provided instructions above with how you can request unblock from an uninvolved administrator, who will make any decision(not me). As I said I am not allowed to disclose the basis of my belief. 331dot (talk) 10:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have also now found that this isn't your first attempt- you have been socking with this account, evading your block on another account. 331dot (talk) 10:54, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dude! Now you are behaving like a bully. I have never used Wiki before. Surendra.viact.ai (talk) 10:56, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You will either request to be unblocked, which someone else will review, or not. I have nothing else to say at this time. Good day. 331dot (talk) 11:02, 31 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]