User talk:Whit.marie

This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by Evoqua Water Technologies for their contributions to Wikipedia.

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... I am trying to insert an image within the company infobox but the image is not appearing..only the file name in red... this is the text I am using for the image:

If you could help me with adding an image that would be great. I also need assistance with just adding an image within the page outside the of infobox

Whit.marie (talk) 14:16, 19 July 2016 (UTC)Whitney Norris[reply]

Before you can insert an image on a page, you have to upload it. See Help:Introduction to uploading images. There are links from there to tell you how to place an image on the page, as well. JohnCD (talk) 14:56, 19 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Whit.marie, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Whit.marie! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Osarius (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 19 July 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. I deleted your article because

it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. You sourced only to your company website, no independent sources
it's all about what you sell, little about the company itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits.
it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: global leader in helping municipalities and industrial customers protect and improve the world's most fundamental natural resource: water. Evoqua has a more than 100-year heritage of innovation and industry firsts, market-leading expertise, and unmatched customer service, where it continues to transform water and wastewater. Its cost-effective and reliable treatment systems and services ensure uninterrupted quantity and quality of water, enable regulatory and environmental compliance, increase efficiency through water reuse, and prepare customers for next-generation demand— pure spam, no facts, and the rest of the article is in the same vein
there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when they are spamlinks to your company and products. Similarly, contact details is spam
the article was a copyright violation of the website. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. Your site is marked © Evoqua Water Technologies LLC 2016, so not PD. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient. But in any case the copyrighted text is far too promotional to be useful for Wikipedia's purposes, so there would not be any point in your jumping through all the hoops that are required.
Your edits indicate that you have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. Thank you for declaring your interest. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting this topic. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization, directly or indirectly, to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not.
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 paid directly or indirectly by the company you are writing about, 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:Whit.marie. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Whit.marie|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

We normally restore deleted text to a sandbox, but for legal reasons, we do not do so with copyright material. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:03, 20 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your quick respond. I apologize for going against Wikipedia's rules and guide with creating an article. I will from now on disclose my employer on my page. We have several competitors that have Wiki articles about their company. So I would like to give it another shot with creating an appropriate article including reliable sources and eliminating promoting the company. Would it be possible to get back the draft I sent to you of the article so I can eliminate the advertising sections and add in reliable resource to the content I already drafted? If not do I have to just start from scratch again? And do I need to create a new account?

{{paid|user=Whit.marie|employer=Evoqua Water Technologies|client=}}.

I added this: to my userPage: $ This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by Evoqua Water Technologies for their contributions to Wikipedia.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Evoqua Water Technologies (July 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The draft should focus on what others have written about the company rather than what it has written. The lists of products and brands read like catalogs.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Evoqua Water Technologies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 21:32, 21 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Robert for the feedback. I will work on finding other reliable sources to credit my work. Do you have any advice on how to include the brands and products without making it read like catalogs. I really appreciate your help. I have spent a long time trying to get this send thru approval. Any advice is very helpful!

Whitney Norris

I personally do not intend to help paid editors get their drafts through the approval process. I understand that you have spent a lot of time on this, but I and other volunteers have no obligation to help paid editors. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:21, 23 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Robert, I truly appreciate your time contributed on Wikipedia. I am learning a lot with Wiki as I have been drafting this page. I think Wiki is a great platform where others can learn just about everything. Hence, why I have drafted a page about the water industry. I am an intern for my current role in the company, so I am just here to learn as much as I can. This Wiki page is just a step in my learning process. I don't expect you to "help a paid editor" get their page approved, I understand that is not your responsibility on Wiki. Just thought, you could assist in my learning process.

Thank you Robert, Whitney Norris

Your submission at Articles for creation: Evoqua Water Technologies (July 27)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The list of products, services, and brands still reads like a catalog.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Evoqua Water Technologies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 20:51, 27 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Business Wire

Business Wire is not an independent, reliable source. It is a repository for corporate press releases. Your draft should summarize what truly independent sources say about the company. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:12, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Removing AFC templates

AFC decline templates and comment templates contain instructions that they should not be removed. They are removed automatically by a script when the draft is accepted, but they remain as part of the history of the draft until then. Maybe you didn't notice those instructions and didn't know any better. They have been re-added. Now you know. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:46, 28 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Evoqua Water Technologies (July 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bradv was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Evoqua Water Technologies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bradv 03:16, 29 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Evoqua Water Technologies (August 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please, no resubmitting, as there's still essentially information that is advert-like such as about products; focus with only news that are not trivial passing mentions, social media, news about funding or financing, press releases (including republished PR) and interviews.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Evoqua Water Technologies and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 01:43, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,SwisterTwister : Thank you for your recent feedback. I am unsure how the Evoqua Water Technologies page is "advert-like"? I have made the content factual based, displaying no advertising, just sticking to basic facts about the water company. As regards, to your "trivial mentions" comment, I have found several Google scholarly sources that talk about Evoqua...So wouldn't they be independent reliable sources? Not to mention, looking at another company's Wiki article in the water industry Calgon Carbon https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Calgon_Carbon, they have incorporated several news based articles regarding the company. The Evoqua article I have drafted is very similar to this one above. It includes several sources pulled directly from the company website itself, along with several published news releases. How did this article get approved if the content is very similar to the Evoqua Water Technologies.

Thank You, Whit.marie (talk) 12:27, 5 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]