User talk:MartinOrl087

September 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy or request a change of username.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

Please also note that you are permitted to use a username that contains the name of a company or organization if it identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87".

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text

{{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}

at the bottom of your talk page. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names.

Thank you. 331dot (talk) 09:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

MartinOrl087 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

MartinOrl087 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Apologies, made username based on a workplace I'm fond off, please change it to a more personal one for me to be more close to my own name and age.

Accept reason:

Username changed. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"Martin0087" is taken, which prevents your username choice from being accepted by the system. Please choose something else(you may simply edit your existing request, no need to create a new one). 331dot (talk) 09:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the change in name, I appreciate it.

January 2021

Hello MartinOrl087. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Veleco, 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:MartinOrl087. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MartinOrl087|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. Jack Frost (talk) 00:44, 10 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Jack Frost:Hello Jack Frost, if I am to understand the topic of this notification, it is assumed that I have a personal financial stake in promoting a topic on wiki. Allow me to clarify that is not the case. Simply put, a friend of mine was recently in need of a mobility vehicle, and I was helping him browse the net for the existing companies. Thing is, the Veleco company which said friend settled for in the end, turned out to be most helpful, and I was surprised to find they did not exist on Wikipedia at all. Since I do work as a SEO specialist by trade, I have added an article about their company to contribute to Wikipedia's database of knowledge, because I simply found it lacking. After all Wikipedia is to be a database of information to which users contribute.

To answer the most vital question I can clearly say that all this was done out of my free will without any direct or indirect compensation, this includes any edits made by me on the article regarding Veleco as well. I do however feel that I might have made a bit of a blunder because I can imagine why my creation of this article and any edits on it might have been viewed as paid advocacy. Rest assured thought, that there is no COI or breach or any black hat SEO involved in this whole situation.

On my end I can assure, that all information contributed to Wikipedia by me, before being published, was passed through the company's CEO to avoid miss information of any kind on what they are. So again, no money was involved in the whole process and I did receive their approval to publish the article. The company for which I have written an article regarding Veleco also provided a photo and a logo. The information was also verified by me and I did some research on all sources stated in the article, so they are up to date. If there are any questions you might have regarding this whole situation, I will be glad to answer them as well. Kind regards MartinOrl087 (talk) 08:28, 11 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Blood Mirror (January 15)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Needs reception from external news sources.

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:The Blood Mirror 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:The Blood Mirror, 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.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, MartinOrl087! 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! AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 16:09, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Veleco

The article Veleco has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

The coverage (references, external links, etc.) does not seem sufficient to justify this article passing Wikipedia:General notability guideline nor the more detailed Wikipedia:Notability (companies) requirement. WP:BEFORE did not reveal any significant coverage on Gnews, Gbooks or Gscholar. If you disagree and deprod this, please explain how it meets them on the talk page here in the form of "This article meets criteria A and B because..." and ping me back through WP:ECHO or by leaving a note at User talk:Piotrus. Thank you.

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. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:26, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Piotrus Thank you for your input as it is appreciated, however I would like to object to article deletion that was suggested by you due to two reasons. Firstly, according to WP:BEFORE, point C, this article is still very recent. As per guidelines for Nominating article(s) for deletion "If the article was recently created, please consider allowing the contributors more time to develop the article". Secondly, the fact that no notable sources yet exist does not mean they will not show up in the near future. This does not mean I suggest in any way to wait forever until someone happens to contribute of course. I have taken steps to call the company in question today to see if they have any notable sources to keep their article on wiki according to wikipedia standards. Turns out last year they had to cancel attendance in a big european expo due to pandemic, which would be exactly the notability that is needed for this article to stay on wikipedia. I was informed they will attend one in the near future though, possibly this year. As such, instead of deletion I would like to suggest one of two other solutions here so we can reach consensus. First would be allowing the article time to develop. This is my subjective opinion, but I am pretty certain it will happen, and the article didn't have time to do so yet. A proper course of action would be best to avoid Wikipedia:Overzealous deletion if the article will have to be remade later this year. Second suggestion from me would be simply moving the article to Wikipedia:Drafts in draft space instead of deleting it altogether which also is much better than deletion in this case. I hope you see my point of view on this and can relate to it. I would deeply appreciate if you could take steps to remove the PROD, I could do it myself, but unfortunately it was assumed in the past I have a COI on this article and topic of scooters, and I do my best to avoid making any edits on Veleco and scooter related topics altogether. I stick to suggestion edits only so if anything worth adding to the article shows up, I will only be posting suggestion edits at most. Thanks for cooperation on this mate, really glad to see an seasoned editor looked into this. MartinOrl087 (talk) 10:25, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

MartinOrl087, you are welcome to remove the PROD notice, I am totally fine with you doing so. Anyone, regardless of a COI, can deprod an article. For the rest, you make some good points, but an AfD discussion would like to be best unless the article is improved to address the concerns I raised. Do keep in mind that the article can always be draftified, and you could restore it in a year or two, expanded with future sources about them attending an expo or such once the coverage is there. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 11:19, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Piotrus thanks for fast reply, I will remove the PROD notice at once then, and I do agree with all concerns you have raised as they are very sound and there is indeed lack of notibility at this time. I am certain the article will get them soon, as I got info from that phone call I mentioned earlier that this company will be attending expos, so shouldn't be an issue down the road. I'm going to assume good faith on what they told me. If they prolong though, I will personally start AfD on this to draftify them to keep wikipedia clean. Also if you are editing, you might want to look into other scooter manufacturers, like Aeon Motor as example from top of the list of scooter manufacturers. When I was making Veleco I did research on how other similar articles look when I wrote my own and I saw lots companies with no notability there and other issues, which must be a relic from past. Would mark those myself, but that would look odd and suspicious if I first contribute out of my goodwill a scooter manufacturing company article and then proceed to mark other companies articles for issues so I cannot unfortunately help with this.MartinOrl087 (talk) 11:39, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Veleco moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Veleco, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. CUPIDICAE💕 13:20, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Praxidicae thank you for moving this to draft space, this is much appreaciated. Once notability meets Wikipedia's standards I will submit it for review when more sources appear. Until then, best regards MartinOrl087 (talk) 15:22, 3 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Veleco (March 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by CNMall41 were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

References must meet the criteria laid out in WP:ORGCRIT.

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:Veleco 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:Veleco, 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.

CNMall41 (talk) 19:52, 11 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Veleco (May 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Nomadicghumakkad 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 (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). 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:Veleco 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:Veleco, 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.

Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 10:20, 12 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:The Blood Mirror

Hello, MartinOrl087. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:The Blood Mirror, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:The Blood Mirror

Hello, MartinOrl087. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "The Blood Mirror".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 16:17, 15 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Veleco

Hello, MartinOrl087. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Veleco, 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) 12:02, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]