User talk:Joe Detroit

Welcome to Wikipedia

Hi, I'm Oiyarbepsy and I can see fairies.

Welcome and thank you for joining and editing Wikipedia.

It looks like you might be having trouble getting used to how Wikipedia operates. I want you to succeed and make great contributions, and I'm here to help. Please click this link, then hit the new section button, and let me know what you'd like to learn. I really like to pretend to know what I'm doing here, so I'm sure I'll give you the right answer, and if I don't, you can whack me with a trout.

Thanks, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:19, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, this is not an automated bot that placed this message. Yes, it is boilerplate, but it won't appear anywhere if I don't put it there.

Speedy deletion nomination of Dan Engel

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 Dan Engel, 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. Joe Detroit (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)Oiyarbepsy (talk) 03:19, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oiyarbepsy, oh sorry. I'm not clear on what counts as promotion or spam in the Dan Engel entry. I tried to give third-party sources for all facts. Can you provide som,e examples of what counts as promotion? Also, sorry but I don't see the "contest the nomination" button.Did I delete that by mistake? Sorry Joe Detroit(talk) 04:46, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The worst example: "FastSpring...known for its phenomenal customer service, had an industry unheard-of..." - multiple peacock terms using words that are opinion and can't possibly be fact. In short, this is not a neutral and accurate description of him, but essentially a cover letter he would use for his next job application. The page would need a lot of rewrite to remove all this promotional language. I also am questioning the reliability and relevance to some of your sources - a news piece about Google buying Picasa says nothing about Engel, and some sources, at first glance, appear to be fluff pieces designed to raise stock prices. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:03, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oiyarbepsy , is the Dan Engel entry already gone before I even had a chance to address the errors you point out? Entries on Wik often have a motive, but that doesn't negate their facts. And for sure, my reserach shows that Dan Engel doesnt have any stock to sell. I'd love to fix those errors, but can I also point out that people are described in Wik according to their achievements, so an entry can hardly not promote them. Joe Detroit (talk) 16:12, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Your persistent removal of speedy deletion tags, despite them saying you must not, suggests that you have little interest in following our rules. The article can be restored to a user sandbox for improvement, and I can give details of what I think needs fixing, but I'm running out of editing time tonight, so it will be tomorrow before i get back to you. If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it, especially if you are being paid directly or indirectly to create the article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:37, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Oh please see my reply on Jimfbleak's page. I think your characterization is extremely unfair and definitely discouraging to this new Wikipeida participant. You say, "Your persistent removal of speedy deletion tags, despite them saying you must not, suggests that you have little interest in following our rules." I think I removed a tag once and it was by mistake. And I immediately pointed out my mistake to the patrolling editor. I am appealing to Oiyarbepsy who says he can see fairies, but I am wondering if he can see fairly? Thx Joe Detroit (talk) 00:00, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joe, I'm not an administrator, so I can't see the page either. Ask Jimfbleak to email you or restore the page in your userspace. BTW, the reason I can see fairies is cause I am one. Oiyarbepsy (talk) 02:54, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Detroit, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Joe Detroit! 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 peers and experienced editors. I hope to see you there! Samwalton9 (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 17:21, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

You are correct in that you only removed an SD tag once, I was in a hurry and misread the history, my apologies for suggesting otherwise. Now, some issues

you have to provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. It is now Wikipedia policy that biographical articles about living people must have independent verifiable references, as defined in the link, or they will be deleted. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to his companies, 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. As far as I can see, all the refs except the NYT are either just reporting what he has told them directly or through press releases, or are linked to him, like Engels Ventures.
it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic. Examples of unsourced or inappropriately sourced claims presented as fact include: the leading incubator... generating tens of millions in revenue over a two-year period... growing revenue by 7x in ten months... a leading e-payment platform for 3,000+ desktop software... known for its phenomenal customer service... industry unheard-of annual churn rate...

Your article is hagiographic in tone, with no hint that he is anything short of superhuman. He has no nationality, place or date of birth or family life, which you would expect as standard in a proper biographical, rather than promotional, article.

I asked you before if you have have a conflict of interest when editing this article, if so you must declare it. You have worked very hard on this article and no other, and you claim to be a professional writer. This raises the possibility that you are being remunerated to produce this article. 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. 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.

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, 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:Joe Detroit. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Joe Detroit|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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. I've said that I'll restore the text to a subpage, but I require an answer to the COI questions above before I do so. If you have no COI, or if you have a COI and declare it, that's fine. Failure to disclose a COI is not Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:02, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Great Jimfbleak, I appreciate all the help. Regarding COI, yes, I am a writer friend of Dan and he wanted a page , but I believe I can adopt a neutral tone and use only third-party substantiated facts. BTW, I have done minor edits to Wik pages when grammar or lack of clarity bothered me. Also I wrote an entry based on my intellectual interests, but that was a while back and I had no user name.

BTW, Wik asks for third-party validation of facts, but of course individual workers at corporations don't get publicity for their achievements, since that's not in the company's interest. In effect, what's public and validated by third parties is a matter of corporate power. See http://www.jstor.org/stable/2094279?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents Joe Detroit (talk) 18:18, 20 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]

of course individual workers at corporations don't get publicity for their achievements, since that's not in the company's interest—I agree, but that's a problem you have to solve. I'll recreate shortly here, I may make some minor tweaks, so check the history Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:02, 21 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I made these edits. It looks better. Use the "move" tab to put it back in article space and se what happens. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:30, 7 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oops rename

Joe, looks like you mistakenly moved your User Talk page (this one) to the title Dan Engel. I moved it back here to fix this oops. Now Dan Engel is a redirect to your user talk page, and it will be deleted by an admin to clean this up. Do you have a page in your userspace that you want to promote to article? Oiyarbepsy (talk) 05:27, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Oiyarbepsy, I probably made the same mistake again. Sorry, could you correct? Yes, I have a page I want to promote to an article. How do I do that? Thanks!! Joe Detroit (talk) 07:03, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You got it right. , see Dan Engel. Thanks, Oiyarbepsy (talk) 16:28, 8 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]