Talk:Netafim

message: Come on guys - how can you allow Jain Irrigation to have a huge page and not allow  Netafim to simply say what it is?
In the definition below it says that "simply having a company ..... as it's subject does not quality an article for this criterion".  I think there are some "knee-jerk" reactions happening here and you are not taking the time to visit the other links I've provided.  
What is it exactly that you want to take out?  We really tried to state just facts.  We'll take out whatever you want - links, addresses, products - what is it that's the problem?
How is this page different that Rain_Bird, Toro (company) or Jain Irrigation ??
PLEASE check these other pages before you make your decision to delete Netafim.  It's just not logical to allow these other companies and not Netafim.
Blatant advertising. Pages which exclusively promote a company, product, group, service, or person and which would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Note that simply having a company, product, group, service, or person as its subject does not qualify an article for this criterion; an article that is blatant advertising should have inappropriate content as well.
 
This is just down right UNFAIR!  Either delete the other company pages or allow us some basic information.  
Please post your reasons for wanting to delete and we will fix it.  
--NetafimUSA 06:28, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Jain Irrigation

message: The original author had a conflict of interest and produced an article that looked like advertisement, but I have subsequently stripped out most of that stuff to leave what is IMO a decent nucleus for a Wikipedia-style article instead. User:NetafimUSA's been blocked due to his or her username being the same name as the company, hopefully he or she will get a new account with a less company-specific username and return here to contribute. If you do, NetafimUSA, I recommend posting suggestions for additions here on talk rather than adding them directly in order to avoid recurrence of this speedy deletion problem. I'll keep the article on my watchlist and help out with what you think needs doing (or alternately explain why it might not be a good idea to do it). Bryan Derksen 00:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  De-advertising article

message: Prior content in this article duplicated one or more previously published sources. The material was copied from: http://duns100.globes.co.il/en/companies-1000868832. Copied or closely paraphrased material has been rewritten or removed and must not be restored, unless it is duly released under a compatible license. (For more information, please see "using copyrighted works from others" if you are not the copyright holder of this material, or "donating copyrighted materials" if you are.)
For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or published material; such additions will be deleted. Contributors may use copyrighted publications as a source of information, and, if allowed under fair use, may copy sentences and phrases, provided they are included in quotation marks and referenced properly. The material may also be rewritten, providing it does not infringe on the copyright of the original or plagiarize from that source. Therefore, such paraphrased portions must provide their source. Please see our guideline on non-free text for how to properly implement limited quotations of copyrighted text. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with these policies. Thank you.  Lucas559 (talk) 01:35, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Copyright problem removed 

message: user:hamutalr, in regards to your email Tue Aug 11, 12:17MST.  I am going to strongly suggest you read the three pages I list below.  Share this among the managers at your company.
1. WP:COI There are significant concerns with people invested in their topic area also editing such articles.  It is strongly discouraged and could lead to bans of editors and deletion of the Netafim article.  Please read and share WP:COI.  Sadly, this policy is not uniformly enforced across all articles, for example your competitors.  If you want to dispute content, write comments on the talk pages of articles.
2. WP:DCM The company's information cannot be used without extensive paraphrasing because it is copyrighted content.  Your relationship to that information is legally irrelevant.  If you want to use such content directly, follow the advice on WP:DCM.
3. Wikipedia is a free information source that can be edited by anyone.  There is no way - ZERO - to have the Netafim article only edited by authors you appoint or agree with.  It is free for all to edit, for better or worse (we try to make it "for the better" through dialogues like the one we are having).  Wikipedia content can be copied, modified, and redistributed by anyone (provided they follow CC-BY-SA policies).
The "village pump" WP:VP is a neutral group of wikipedians that can help answer all your questions.  --Lucas559 (talk) 03:25, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Conflicts of Interest and Encyclopedic Content 

message: This page has a lot of blandishments. Pioneer? Seriously?
Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertisement portal to brazenly vaunt about themselves.
Any leads on this?  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 59.180.186.73 (talk) 23:28, 9 March 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't understand what you're getting at? If you run a google search you will find plenty of evidence that will help one on expanding the Netafim article. Govvy (talk) 16:32, 10 March 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Netafim: Pioneer?