Trent77

Welcome!

Hello, Starkjames, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Argo Group International Holdings, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Starting an article
• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! RA0808 ^talk_contribs 18:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Argo Group International Holdings

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

• It is a very short article providing little or no context to the reader. (See section A1 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Wikipedia has standards for the minimum necessary information to be included in short articles; you can see these at Wikipedia:Stub. Also please note that articles must be on notable subjects and should provide references to reliable sources that verify their content.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

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 "Click here to 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 removed 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, you can place a request here. RA0808 ^talk_contribs 18:20, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Argo Group Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Argo Group Logo.jpg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 22:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Portrait of Mark E. Watson III.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Portrait of Mark E. Watson III.jpg, which you've attributed to A VRT notice was applied over 60 day(s) ago, but no message at VRTS has been found since this tag was applied.. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.  Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 21:13, 20 May 2014 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Picture of Mark E. Watson III.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Picture of Mark E. Watson III.jpg, which you've attributed to A VRT notice was applied over 60 day(s) ago, but no message at VRTS has been found since this tag was applied.. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

• make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
• Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 20:11, 23 September 2014 (UTC)

Problems with upload of File:Labor Law Plus logo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Labor Law Plus logo.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from, who created it, or what the copyright status is. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.

To add this information, click on this link, then click the "Edit" tab at the top of the page and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

• Wikipedia:Image use policy
• Wikipedia:Image copyright tags

Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Labor Law Plus

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 Labor Law Plus, 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, product, group, service or person 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 removed 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. Omni Flames (talk) 10:54, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Labor Law Plus (August 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DatGuy 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:Labor Law Plus and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 11:24, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Trent77, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Dat GuyTalkContribs 11:24, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016

Please do not move a page to a title that is harder to follow, or move it unilaterally against naming conventions or consensus. This includes making page moves while a discussion remains under way. We have some guidelines to help with deciding what title is best for a subject. If you would like to experiment with page titles and moving, please use the test Wikipedia. Thank you. Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 11:25, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Labor Law Plus (August 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DatGuy 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:Labor Law Plus and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dat Guy^Talk_Contribs 16:56, 30 August 2016 (UTC)

Reply

Hi, thanks for message. I deleted your article because

• it did not provide adequate independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the company, press releases, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company claims or interviewing its management. most of your "refs" are just repeating what the company and its management have said. You have also made the article look better referenced than it is by listing each of multiple calls to the same reference separately
• You are so busy promoting what you sell that you haven't bothered to tell us how the company meets the notability criteria. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, turnover or profits. I note that the company was founded only in 2013, so at best it might be too soon
• it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.

• It's a sure indicator that if an article starts with ®' or ™ spam will follow. We are not here to protect your registrations
• Examples of unsourced claims presented as fact include: Labor Law Plus®... operates in more than 95 countries worldwide... provides integrated labor and employment legal services, as well as full business law support... can benefit from consistent advice across operations worldwide... finds solutions... provide dedicated coverage through an extensive network of correspondents and contacts... a fast, flexible and cost-efficient service... complete legal support worldwide... supports human resources and company law departments... This fact [sic]distinguishes Labor Law Plus... gives clients access to a wide range of global business law services... Labor Law Plus helps international enterprises... harnessing and integrating the knowledge and skills... These teams of professionals then provide clients with a single set of comprehensive yet flexible services geared to find solutions to their specific needs... geared to relieve clients of the need...— basically, the whole text is a fact-free plug for your company

• If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. If, after reading the information about notability linked above, you still believe that your organisation is notable enough for a Wikipedia article (and that there is significant coverage in reliable, independent secondary sources), you could, if you wish, post a request at Wikipedia:Requested articles for the article to be created. See also Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest.
• If you work directly or indirectly for the company, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very 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 paid directly or indirectly by the company you are writing about, 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:Trent77. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Trent77|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

Articles in draft space are given some leeway in terms of referencing and showing notability, which is why DatGuy was moved there, but you still can't post such obvious spam. Prior to that it had already been nominated for speedy deletion by Omni Flames. DatGuy twice declined your submission as Submission reads like an advertisement and SwisterTwister later had an edit summary that started Glorified self-PR. Despite your claim, the draft is the opposite of factually correct and is not promotional sounding. It's better if you do not write on behalf of a company, but if you do, you must make the declaration of COI above Jimfbleak (talk) 06:10, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

---

Hello, we submitted this article again in late January keeping this information in mind. With this feedback, we have edited the document multiple times in the hopes of meeting the Wikipedia requirements - yet we keep receiving the same response. There are various other law firms which have familiar Wikipedia pages and there is no problem - what is wrong with ours? ]— Preceding unsigned comment added by Trent77 (talk • contribs) 18:13, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Hi, is the article you are talking about, Transatlantic Law International?  Seagull123  Φ  21:35, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Only with having a quick look at the messages left for you above, and not really knowing much about your contributions, I can say that there are still issues of COIs (if you are paid for editing, you haven't declared it - as far as I can see). Also, if your contributed articles keep getting deleted, try the Article Wizard (making sure you've read Your First Article first). I would also suggest you take note of this bit of the Avoiding Common Mistakes page, "If your company is notable enough, someone else will write an article about it. (See Wikipedia:Business FAQ and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest.)" Make sure anything you write about is truly notable. Also, if the article you are talking about is Transatlantic Law International, then there are a few things I can see that can be improved there, including that there are quite a few (too many) primary sources, try and add more reliable, secondary sources. Visit the reference desk if you need help finding some. Also, the Legal and Business Services section doesn't seem notable, and, in my opinion, is bordering on promotional - as it just seems to be advertising what the company does. May I also say that I'm not currently convinced of the overall article's notability, as when giving the company a quick Google search, only primary sources come up - the company's website, this WP article, a LinkedIn page, etc. And one final thing, if this article keeps getting deleted/rejected for notability (or similar) issues, then maybe the organisation doesn't merit an article on Wikipedia? If you need any other help, then just click here, or leave a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  22:03, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Your draft was, to be blunt, an advertisement. If after Jimfbleak's detailed discussion of the previous article's shortcomings you are still unable to see how wording such as "a unique service platform that works with dedicated teams from top independent firms on a seamless centrally managed basis" is unsuitable for an encyclopedia article, I don't think there's much sense trying any further. I would strongly advise you to drop that project. Huon (talk) 23:36, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Argo Group Logo.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Argo Group Logo.jpg. 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 the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:24, 4 January 2017 (UTC)

Help me!

Please help me with...If I ensure that the Labor Law Plus page is not promotional and ensure I add the caveat that a company has been paid to edit this article, will my article be posted? Or has it been flagged to never receive full consideration (as it was taken down almost immediately last time)?

Trent77 (talk) 14:39, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

It depends on how you use it. Try wording it in a way that it isn't promotional. *Xyaena~* (talk) 16:22, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

{{paid}} template on your user page

Hi, with the {{paid}} template you added to your user page, you haven't added any parameters to it. You need to do this so the template shows who is paying you for editing. Click on this link, then scroll down to the "Arguments" section below the table to see what you can add. To do so, use code like this, {{paid|employer=AB Company|client=ZX Company}}, replacing the names of the companies with who pays you (remove the client parameter if it doesn't apply to you). See the link I provided to see which parameters you can add, and how to add them. If you need any help adding these parameters, just leave a message on my talk page. Thanks.  Seagull123  Φ  21:15, 15 February 2017 (UTC)

copy editing, "company"

@Trent77: Hi. I noticed you made some light edits/copy editing on the Brian Duperreault page. I was just wondering why you capitalized the word "company." Is there a specific time when this should be capitalized that you know? If so, I'll look out for it in future articles. Thanks. -KaJunl (talk) 22:13, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Transatlantic Law International for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Transatlantic Law International is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Transatlantic Law International until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:52, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Labor Law Plus for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Labor Law Plus is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Labor Law Plus until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 13:40, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Mark E. Watson III for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Mark E. Watson III is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Mark E. Watson III until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:34, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles, or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates, as you did with Mark E. Watson III. Otherwise, it may be difficult to create consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Cmr08 (talk) 21:48, 22 January 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Pina Albo for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pina Albo is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Pina Albo until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Rusf10 (talk) 02:16, 29 January 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at Mark E. Watson III. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 20:50, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

February 2018

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ we would like to apologize for this - we were updating Mark E. Watson's page with new content and sources, as per the notice and the alert must have been deleted in the process.

Trent77 who is we? CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 05:02, 5 February 2018 (UTC) Myself and a friend I'd been collaborating this on with.

¯\_(ツ)_/¯Do you know why the Mark E. Watson page was taken down? On Friday I completely revised the text and included updated citations. Should I try doing this again, with the new copy? Any clarification or suggestions would be very appreciated!