User talk:SaraMas

Speedy deletion nomination of NoPassword

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 NoPassword, 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, product, group, service or person 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 removed 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. DGG ( talk ) 05:46, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. Note that admin DGG only tagged the article for deletion, the decision to do so was mine. 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 gave six references, but one was your own site, two were reporting claims made by your executives and three didn't mention your product at all. No independent third-party sources
• I can't see any claim of notability, such as sales figures, profits from this product, or anything that's covered by the notability guidelines
• it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

• Your article is just a sales pitch; it's all about what your product is claimed to do, and nothing else. No history, facts about the company making it, or anything else apart from telling us how wonderful it is. No limitations on its effectiveness either, apparently
• there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. that's particularly the case when it is a spamlink to your website.
• Examples of unsourced or inappropriately sourced claims presented as fact include: fast-growing venture backed startup... been in the spotlight... prevents data breaches and dramatically enhances cyber security... seamlessly integrated...— sales leaflet, basically.

• Your edits indicate that you have an obvious conflict of interest when it comes to editing articles about this subject. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your product 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.
• If you work directly or indirectly for the company, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you 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:SaraMas. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=SaraMas|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.

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:59, 16 June 2016 (UTC)