Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
A person editing with an account is not treated as doing so on behalf of another body or person. (Exceptions are exceedingly rare and require approval.) Examples: Names promoting a business, group, activist stance, or organization; Offensive or disruptive: User names are used to simply identify users uniquely.
Imagine a Wikipedia where the willingness to donate was allowed to control content and discussions. This is a heavily-trafficked site with high Google ranking on almost any subject it covers. The amount it could make allowing companies to pay for control over their own articles is huge.
Adding the name of a non-notable individual to a stand-alone list of alumni is bad for several reasons. It undermines Wikipedia's legitimacy as an encyclopedia. Facebook, LinkedIn and other social networking sites provide people a forum to discuss their lives. Wikipedia is meant to provide factual information about notable topics.
This page details arguments that are commonly seen in deletion discussions that have been identified as generally unsound and unconvincing. These are arguments that should generally be avoided – or at the least supplemented with a better-grounded rationale for the position taken, whether that be "keep", "delete" or some other objective.
Wikipedia brings free knowledge to the world. Please consider making a donation to support our operations. Wikipedia is non-profit and free of advertising. Please consider making a donation. Wikipedia is free for you, but not free for us. Consider a donation to keep our mission strong. Make a donation to Wikipedia and give the gift of knowledge!
Wikipedia depends on donations (there is literally no other meaningful revenue source) and donations go to support Wikipedia both directly (software, hardware, bandwith, operations engineers) and indirectly (chapter activities of all kinds such as local press relationships, GLAM activities, new editor recruitment, etc.).
Both Czech(ia) and Timor are rather a wikipedia:naming conflict matter (than exclusively "common names" matter): the wikipedia:naming conflict guideline gives a method for balancing "common name" and other arguments for naming (i.e. taking account of "official name" and "self-identification").
Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information, meaning that some things are not suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia. Everything in Wikipedia needs to be verifiable information published in reliable sources before content can even be considered for inclusion, otherwise it could be considered original research .