This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of Canadian Neonatal Network, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.canadianneonatalnetwork.org/portal. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 13:28, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Canadian Neonatal Network requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a clear copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. If you are not the owner of the external website but have permission from that owner, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. You might want to look at Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag - if no such tag exists then the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate and adding a hangon tag is unnecessary), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. — Timneu22 · talk 13:29, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself. Please use the {{hangon}} template on the page instead if you disagree with the deletion, and make your case on the page's talk page. Thank you. — Timneu22 · talk 14:13, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Please stop removing speedy deletion notices from pages that you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Canadian Neonatal Network. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing. Jusdafax 14:40, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
This is your final warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you remove a speedy deletion notice from a page you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to Canadian Neonatal Network. Jusdafax 14:41, 1 June 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Smackerella, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.
I notice that one of the first articles you have edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been reverted for this very reason.
To reduce the chances of deletion, you might like to draft your article before submission, then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. To start creating a draft article, just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit that page as you would any other. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.
The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing.
If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:
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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!
(talk→ BWilkins ←track) 15:07, 1 June 2010 (UTC){{helpme}}
Hi Smackeralla. I'm sorry you appear to have had a rather rough introduction to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, many organizations try to use the popularity of the site to get some free promotion/advertising and, especially when they do this by repeating their website on Wikipedia, it is dealt with swiftly. In your case, the page was copy-pasted from the website which, even though approved language, remains in the copyright of its authors and is not permissible on Wikipedia as a result. You could try getting permission to release the text under the Creative Commons 3.0 licence (see full text here, and note in particular that it requires release for any purpose, including commercial and arbitrary editing and amendment). Even if this permission were granted, I would in general say that, from experience, the material is not suitable as a encyclopedia article. After all, you wouldn't expect to find a re-print of a website in a printed encyclopedia! So I'd suggest that a properly encyclopedic article be written which properly established notability from independent, third-party, reliable sources. Furthermore, as a general principle, if your organization is sufficiently notable to warrant an encyclopedia article, then someone else will eventually write one for you, and avoid all the conflict of interest problems that arise from writing it yourself. Instead of writing about the Network directly, consider contributing to one of the many related articles instead, where your knowledge and experience would, I am sure, be greatly welcomed. I hope that helps a little. Wikipedia is more friendly than you may have thought from your first experience of it, so I'm sorry again about that. Regards, Splash - tk 22:19, 2 June 2010 (UTC)