User talk:Mra516

This is Mra516's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Business Energy Quotes (June 12)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Calliopejen1 was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:Business Energy Quotes 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:Business Energy Quotes, 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, 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.

Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, NGPLTD! 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! Calliopejen1 (talk) 00:07, 12 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Business Energy Quotes (June 17)[edit]

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

~ Amkgp 💬 16:09, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Business Energy Quotes[edit]

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 Draft:Business Energy Quotes, 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, group, product, service, person, or point of view 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 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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020[edit]

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions other than promoting your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, you must:

Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:01, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Mra516 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am a graduating university student who is aspiring to become a content writer within the energy industry. I am trying to build a unique portfolio of content I have written. I fully understand the error that I made in writing the content, and have now read around your guidelines on neutral point of view again. Thank you for your feedback, I will not repeat the error again. I would like to, if permitted, upload the article entry by removing all promotional language. I would very much appreciate keeping this article as it would improve the variety of content I have written and gives my portfolio greater depth. I also enjoy writing this type of content and would seek to do more of these in the future. This is my first experience with article entries, and I have realised my error and set about correcting it. I am not paid, encouraged or endorsed by the company in question. I am writing articles out of self-interest as well as my writing development. I have resultantly changed username and have made extensive notes on your neutral point of view guidelines. Please do allow me to make the necessary changes. Thank you.

Decline reason:

Procedural close. As no admin has taken you up on this in more than two weeks, I am declining this. Feel free to make another request, but make sure that it follows the guide to appealing blocks and is substantially different from your past requests. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:18, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

What is your connection to the GPG or how did you come to write about it? 331dot (talk) 08:27, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am not connected to GPG, I am not employed by GPG. I have two friends who have previously completed work experience at GPG but have since moved on. NGPLTD (talk) 08:31, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

So you wrote about the website as a university project or assignment? It was sourced to nothing but press releases and other routine business announcements, which do not establish that the website meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable website. I suspect it is too soon for an article about this new website. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Effectively, yes. I am working on building a bank of unique content as I look into employment as an aspiring journalist. Please do not delete this page as much research has gone into it. Please allow me to change my username, and make revisions to this page as more references come out over the next few months. I do intend to add more pages in future to develop my writing. I fully intend to implement the feedback provided going forward.NGPLTD (talk) 08:51, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have changed your username from NGPLTD. I would note that journalistic writing is very different from the writing style of a Wikipedia article; whereas the news/media tells about something firsthand, Wikipedia articles summarize (in essence) what the news and other reliable sources state and not firsthand information(like press releases, staff interviews, or other routine announcements). Justlettersandnumbers do you have any comment? 331dot (talk) 09:04, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you kindly. I will ensure to that I conduct more through Literature Reviews going forward. Am I able to continue revising the article I created, using your feedback to make changes?Mra516 (talk) 09:10, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, 331dot. Mra516, can you explain why, if you have no connection to GPG, you chose as your username the website of Northern Gas and Power? According to the text you wrote, "GPG trades in the UK as Northern Gas and Power, an award-winning UK energy consultancy" [sic]. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:35, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for getting in touch Justlettersandnumbers. I initially thought each article needed an individual username/account. The research I did was initially going to result in an NGP LTD page, but this proved to be too difficult. I then decided to write a page on "Business Energy Quotes" under the same username as they are a subsidiary. Having had the feedback, I am now more aware of the guidelines around publishing, and I wholly apologise for any errors. I would like to continue editing as I have found the research and writing experience quite enjoyable. I am looking to write more articles if the opportunity allows. Once again, I must reiterate, I am not employed by GPG or any of its subsidiaries. Thanks. Mra516 (talk) 12:09, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I'm sorry, but I don't find that convincing. No objection to anyone else unblocking if they judge it differently. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:01, 19 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]