User talk:Aprilnabil

August 2022

Hello, I'm Zinnober9. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Venture capital have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Zinnober9 (talk) 20:15, 14 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of AT Group EPC

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 AT Group EPC, 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 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.
It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://www.at-epc.com/. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:52, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Compliance with cited sources

In the article FutureLearn you changed "According to Financial Times, FutureLearn was the first platform to enable students to earn credits towards a degree from a top UK university from their tablets and smartphones" to say "According to Financial Times, FutureLearn was the first platform to enable students to earn credits towards a degree from a top UK university from their computers, tablets and smartphones". (My emphasis.) The source cited in the associated reference does in fact say what the original version in the article said, and does not say what you claimed it said. Please don't make up things that aren't supported by cited sources. This also casts doubt on the reliability of other content you have added to articles, without providing any source at all. Please don't add material to any article without providing a reference to a reliable source. JBW (talk) 22:22, 19 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of AT Group

Hello Aprilnabil,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged AT Group for deletion, because the article doesn't clearly indicate why the subject is important enough to be included in an encyclopedia.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Thanks!

Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.

* Pppery * _{it has begun...} 12:37, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AT Group

The article was deleted because it did not credibly indicate that it was notable. Wikipedia can't accept an article about everything, the company has to be notable enough to merit inclusion. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 13:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have received your email relating to the deletion of the article AT Group EPC, and I hope I can help you by clarifying some of the relevant points. It is fundamental to the way in which Wikipedia works that discussions about editing of Wikipedia should normally be visible to all editors, unless there is information which, for reasons of confidentiality or otherwise, can't be posted in public view. On this occasion there doesn't seem to any such reason for confidentiality, so I am answering here rather than by email.
Unfortunately very many people come to edit Wikipedia in the same kind of way as you, and, in all innocence, do things which are contrary to policies and guidelines that they had no reason to know existed, and I don't blame anyone for doing so. However, I hope my comments here may help you to avoid similar problems in the future.
The first reason for deletion of the article was that it was unambiguously promotional. Wikipedia is not a medium for businesses to publicise themselves, nor is it a platform for them to promote the view of themselves which they would like to be seen by the public or their customers. That is a job to be performed by a company's own web site, together with any advertising or marketing people they employ or contract. Wikipedia, by contrast, seeks to reflect the way that subjects (including businesses) are shown in independent reliable sources, and to present information from a neutral point of view. There is no place on Wikipedia for a page full of such blatant marketing-speak as "to offer great solutions and deliver excellent services to clients through understanding and engaging in client’s problems", and so on and so on.
Since you have been trying to create an article about the business you work for, under instruction from your boss as part of your paid work, you come under the provisions of the guideline on conflict of interest and the requirement for disclosure of paid editing, and before doing any more editing you should read those, and make sure you comply with them. One thing you will learn there is that creating an article about the business you work for is strongly discouraged.
The second reason for deletion was Wikipedia's copyright policy. It is almost never suitable to copy content from another web site to Wikipedia, for more than one reason, the most important being copyright. When you post anything to Wikipedia you release it for anyone in the world to reuse it, either unchanged or modified in any way whatever, subject to attribution to Wikipedia. It is very rare that the owner of a web site licenses content for such very free reuse, and in those few occasions when they do so, we require proof of the fact. We don't assume that content is freely licensed on the unsubstantiated say so of just anyone who comes along and creates a Wikipedia account.
Most established editors and administrators don't have much sympathy with anyone who seems to be trying to evade the mechanisms put in place to prevent unsuitable editing getting into articles. One example of a method commonly used for that purpose is a new account making exactly ten rather trivial edits, waiting four days or so, and then creating a new article. Actually, people who try to use tricks such as that are often doing themselves no favours, because very often their unsuitable article just gets deleted almost immediately, whereas if they had gone through the proper process of creating a draft and submitting it for review, the submission would have been rejected but not deleted, so they would have had a chance to improve it and resubmit it.
Although it does not relate to the deletion which you referred to in your email, you should also take note of what DatGuy said above. Wikipedia does not seek to have articles on everything and anything, but only on subjects which satisfy our notability guidelines, and unless your business satisfies them, no article will be suitable for Wikipedia, no matter how well it may be written.
I have mentioned a few guidelines and policies. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has, in my opinion, far too many such guidelines and policies, and most of them are longer and more complex that they need to be, which can make them confusing and intimidating for a new editor. However, the page Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations collects together and summarises many of the points from those documents which are most relevant to someone in your position, and it may be helpful for you to read that. JBW (talk) 20:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]