User talk:Charger69

May 2018

Hello. Your recent edit to Comparison of webmail providers appears to have added the name of a non-notable entity to a list that normally includes only notable entries. In general, a person, organization or product added to a list should have a pre-existing article before being added to most lists. If you wish to create such an article, please first confirm that the subject qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article according to Wikipedia's notability guideline. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 21:54, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 8)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

press releases are not reliable independent 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Charger69/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Charger69! Having an article draft 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! Theroadislong (talk) 16:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 8)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

zero independent sources do zero chance of being accepted.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Charger69/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:52, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Charger69/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Charger69/sandbox. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:06, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Why does GMX Mail have a page approved with 13 of 16 references from their own website? The main article I would have included in references was not allowed due to the URL being banned and I cannot post it even in this reply (Hosting Advice website article published by Sean Garrity in 2019)

We are a relevant provider in the email hosting space. Any advice on improving the submission is appreciated. Is there any way I can include this Hosting Advice reference? Charger69 (talk) 17:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

See other crap exists... GMX Mail is a dreadful example having been tagged with issues over sourcing since 2015, I have removed much of the primary sourced promotion, thank you for bringing it to our attention, now please make the required paid editing disclosure as required. Theroadislong (talk) 18:08, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 17:17, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Charger69

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Charger69 requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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. Theroadislong (talk) 17:26, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Hello Charger69. 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Charger69. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Charger69|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. Theroadislong (talk) 17:27, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not being compensated directly or indirectly for my edits. I am just trying to get a page posted about my company's web site on Wikipedia. Ryan Charger69 (talk) 18:24, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if you are an unpaid intern (which is the only way I can interpret the juxtaposition of "not compensated" and "my company", you still qualify as a paid editor, and have to disclose that on your user page. --bonadea contributions talk 18:34, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I misunderstood what they were asking for. Yes, I am an employee of Greatmail LLC. Is that what I need to state on my user page? (I am sorry for not understanding the first time if that is the case.) Charger69 (talk) 18:41, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Greatmail LLC (October 8)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Greatmail LLC and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

bonadea contributions talk 18:29, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Greatmail LLC (October 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Greatmail LLC and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 21:44, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Greatmail LLC has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Greatmail LLC. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 21:46, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough, good feedback. I will review and revise. Ryan Charger69 (talk) 21:51, 8 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Greatmail LLC (October 9)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

This article has been declined so many times for the same reason. Instead of fixing only the mentioned issue every decline you have to look over the entire article for promotional tone and remove them before resubmitting again. Especially after the Help Desk talk, You're starting to be quite unclear if you're here to advertise this subject only or trying to contribute. Given the persisting issues after 4 declines, I personally wouldn't hesitate to do "blow it up and start over" thing, but I guess that's too harsh.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Greatmail LLC and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

ABG (Talk/Report any mistakes here) 02:53, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but what do you mean it has been declined so many times for the same reason? The first three declines were related to source references. Only the last decline mentioned a promotional aspect which I quite well understood and fixed. I am missing what you are saying is promotional tone? And what do you mean "after the help desk talk"? I am not trying to promote or advertise. Can you please elaborate what you see is promotional in the present version? I am not trying to be difficult and appreciate your guidance. Ryan 99.50.120.70 (talk) 03:04, 9 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]