User talk:Otterman107

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hudson Middle School (July 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Novem Linguae was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Hudson Middle School and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Hudson Middle School, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

–Novem Linguae (talk) 08:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Otterman107! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! –Novem Linguae (talk) 08:05, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Hudson Middle School

Hello, Otterman107. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Hudson Middle School, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 09:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Hudson Middle School (Texas)

The article Hudson Middle School (Texas) has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable primary school. Fails WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 12:26, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lightspeed Aviation

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 Lightspeed Aviation, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, such as at articles for deletion. (See section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) If a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after debate, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.
• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) 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 deleted 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. 2A00:23EE:1998:7E16:68F0:11FF:FEE4:7CA2 (talk) 01:41, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

July 2023

Hello Otterman107. 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:Otterman107. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Otterman107|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. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:52, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Seraphimblade,

I apologize for how it may have come across; however, I have no relations with this company and have received no compensation whatsoever for writing the article. I simply have too much free time on my hands and enjoy researching and exploring my interests. If there are corrections that could be pointed out to me, however, I would be more than happy to correct them in order for the article to be approved. Sorry for any confusion and thank you again for bringing this to my attention. Otterman107 (talk) 04:18, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

As some examples of the issues (note, examples, not an exhaustive list of them): The article starts off with an external link to the company's website. Article text should not contain external links. If the organization has an official website, a link to that goes at the bottom of the article in an "External links" section, not in the lead sentence. They strive to... We're not looking for marketese about what they "strive to" do, but rather what reliable and independent sources confirm they've actually done. ...with a reputation of a company who set the standards in the industry. More marketese; completely inappropriate. In 2000, Lightspeed's XL series introduced Auto Shutoff™. One sure sign of spam is the use of trademark symbols; articles should never use those. Most of the article was unreferenced sales brochure style material, and that stuff didn't even have any references. Articles must be neutral in both tone and content, not promote anyone or anything, including by "talking up", and stick to facts confirmed by reliable and independent sources without any editorializing. Also, the sources that were there do not demonstrate that the subject is notable, since most are written by the company itself or organizations it works closely with. We're interested in what sources independent of the company say about it, not what it says about itself or what its partners say about it. If a substantial quantity of reliable and independent source material about the company does not exist, it is not appropriate for there to be an article about it at all. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 05:35, 8 July 2023 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Lightspeed Aviation logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Lightspeed Aviation logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:28, 11 July 2023 (UTC)