User talk:Drm310/Archive 13

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 → Archive 20

Draft:Zero has a value

Interesting. I figured there had to be some way to speedy that rather than taking it to MFD. Meters (talk) 05:46, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

@Meters: Honestly, I don't know if the reviewing admin will accept that as a valid CSD copyvio. We'll see... --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:52, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
It made sense to me. I'll check later to find out. Even without the copyright tag it's never going to be an article. Meters (talk) 05:56, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
Gone, and now I can see that that is the same rationale that was used the first time it was speedied. Meters (talk) 18:18, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Questions for Editing page: Alexandria Constantinova Szeman

Drm310

I am trying to determine if the article Alexandria Constantinova Szeman is sufficiently neutral in tone and sufficiently supported by external sources before proceeding. I hired someone to write it for me, but I put it into Wikipedia because I know how to format.

I don't make any money from this, and I don't get paid for doing the formatting. Did you want me to change the User name on the account?

I'm a bit confused, I admit. Constantinova (talk) 14:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC) Constantinova (user name)

Hello Constantinova. First I must ask, are you in fact Alexandria Constantinova Szeman, the person who is the subject of the article? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:33, 6 June 2017 (UTC)
Before I say anything else, let me first direct your attention to the Wikipedia legal policy on paid editing. You should read, understand, and follow the directions on that page since they are part of this site's Terms of Use. You agreed to follow those terms when you created an account here.
Secondly, the article for Alexandria Constantinova Szeman has been reviewed by another editor, @Melcous:, who already indicated some issues by placing the big box with the orange border at the top of the page. The most important feedback they left was concerning the notability of this author. You should not continue to edit the article yourself to address these concerns. Rather, you should use the talk page devoted to the article to suggest changes for other editors to make. You can use the Template:Request edit to ensure that everyone knows what is happening and what you are requesting. To use this template:
  1. Go to the article's Talk page and click the Edit tab
  2. Create a new section on this page by typing something like this ==Some proposed changes==
  3. Directly below this type {{request edit}}
  4. Underneath this, write out your request and provide links to any sources which support any claims made
  5. At the end, sign the post using four tildes: ~~~~
  6. Click on the Show preview button and have a look to make sure the request appears the way you want it to
  7. If you wish to make any corrections or additions, you may do so in the edit box below the preview (scroll down to see this box); preview your post as many times as you wish, and when you are satisfied, click on the Save page button
I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 16:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)

The Hong Kong Printing Press Limited

I do not understand why my claim that the HKPP should be included as a Security Printer of Chinese Bank Notes because I happen to be related to the former Directors. I, like many collectors of Chinese Bank Notes dating from 1906 - 1949 have many of these genuine notes in my possession all with the imprint printed on the front of the Note "Litho by the HongKong Printing Press". I am perfectly willing to send JPEG images of these notes (But do not know how) if required. I am simply noting a fact. I do not know how else to inform Wikipedia of their error in not including HKPP as a bonafide member of Security Printers that were very active in Asia.

Eddie Xavier Eduhkpp24 203.45.86.75 (talk) 01:55, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text as article content. This means you cannot post text from other websites into an article unless the copyright owner has provided with the proper proof of ownership and release for the material.
Wikipedia also does not consider other wiki sites to be reliable sources. That is because wikis consist of user-generated content, which lack the necessary reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight.
Finally, Wikipedia cannot accept original research. If information you post has never been published in a reliable source, then it cannot exist on Wikipedia, no matter how much you know or believe it to be true. Wikipedia articles are summaries of previously published material from reliable sources, therefore the principle of verifiablity, not truth prevails. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 03:32, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Entripy

I'm trying to create a page for my company Entripy Custom Clothing. I'm having a lot of trouble navigating through Wikipedia's process for creating a page. I've created content that simply states what the company does and is backed up by references and it keeps getting deleted. The account has now been deactivated so I'm not sure how I can go in and edit or create a new page without it being blocked again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lisa.Evans (talk • contribs) 14:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Lisa.Evans: If you have not already done so, please consult Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. You have made the proper disclosure, which is good. However, you should realize that Wikipedia highly discourages people from writing about their own companies, because of the inherent difficulty in writing about the subject with the required neutral point of view.
Your article contains three references. The Globe and Mail article is a good one, as it was written by a third party working for a publication with an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. The other two, however, are problematic:
  1. The Newswire reference is a company-authored press release. This is self-published and therefore considered unreliable.
  2. The South Asian Focus article was apparently written by you. Therefore this is again self-published company-authored material, and therefore an unreliable source.
These sources lack the necessary independence to be considered reliable. That makes your article backed by only one reliable source, which is not enough to satisfy Wikipedia's notability criteria for companies. Your company needs to have received coverage from multiple, reliable third-party sources to be considered notable and therefore worthy of inclusion. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:05, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

Rebekah Radice page

Hi Drm310. Thanks for your response. I am not Leeann Cannon. I have no affiliation with Rebekah Radice and have never met her. No do I do any business with her. Leeann Cannon is a friend and asked me to post an objective, unbiased info page on her. I am not getting paid to do so. I'm hoping this doesn't violate any terms. Please let me know. --Pnnduvall (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 21:51, 12 June 2017 (UTC)

@Pnnduvall: Thank you for your response. Leeann posted the same content, which was a copyright violation. She also did not disclose her professional affiliation with Rebekah Radice, which is required under Wikipedia's terms of use. It was improper for her to ask you to repost the same content, as it is essentially conflict of interest editing by proxy. I would advise you not to post any more material on her behalf, as this will appear to be a practice referred to as meat puppetry. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:18, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
@Drm310: Thank you for clarifying. I won't repost. -Pnnduvall (talk)

Managing a conflict of interest

Dear Drm310, many thanks for your Inputs and insight about wiki. First, let me acknowledge that I am new to wiki and for sure not aware regarding many wiki policies. But If I talk about an article I have created, this article is not promoting any company as such since this article is relating to latest development happening in INDIA. In case you find time to study a bit about India, you will get to know that from July 2017 onward there will be whole new taxation system called Goods and service Tax (GST) in India. The article I have created here is talking about the procedure for registration under GST in India. This is the interesting topic of most of the people in India. I found this detail in the more structured way at the link I have shared. I have talked to those people as well before posting to wiki that is why I am so confident that I will get no objection certificate from those people. I have created this post with the intention to get this information for the benefit of Public at large while following policies of Wiki.

I hope I have clear my intention. Please guide me further! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sachinvjm (talk • contribs) 13:32, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

@Sacginvjm: Thank you for your message. I believe that your intentions are good, but as you noted, your article did go against a few of Wikipedia's many policies.
Firstly, as I already mentioned, you cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder. In short, a copyright owner cannot offer Wikipedia a one-time license for use. Rather, the copyright to the material has to be released – permanently and irrevocably – into the public domain or under a free copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia's licenses. This is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, so all content must be licensed for that purpose. You can learn more about this policy at Wikipedia:Copyrights.
Information in Wikipedia must be taken from reliable sources. A reliable source should be independent of the topic being discussed, and have an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight.
Of course, we welcome the input of subject-matter experts. However, they are not exempt from fundamental Wikipedia policies; in particular, the policies of no original research and verifiability along with guidelines such as reliable sources apply to expert editors just as well.
Use caution when citing material you have written yourself, as per WP:SELFCITE:

Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion: propose the edit on the article's talk page and allow others to review it.

Hopefully this should give you some guidance when making contributions to Wikipedia. Best of luck to you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:35, 14 June 2017 (UTC)

Marjan van Aubel

Dear Drm310, I am not in any way being paid to create promotional exposure for Marjan van Aubel. She is a prominent award winning and internationally recognised designer with a lot of articles written about her work in major design and technology publications. Please let the article remain, and I will contribute to it using a proper and good tone. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Asmundsollihogda (talk • contribs) 18:09, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

@Asmundsollihogda: Thank you for clarifying that. You had written "I represent Marjan van Aubel" and therefore I assumed you were a publicist or other type of paid representative. I am not an administrator and have no influence on whether the article will be retained. However, I can give you some advice.
You cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia even if the copyright holder has given you their permission to do so. In short, a copyright owner cannot offer Wikipedia a one-time license for use. Rather, the copyright to the material has to be released – permanently and irrevocably – into the public domain or under a free copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia's licenses. This is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, so all content must be licensed for that purpose. You can learn more about this policy at Wikipedia:Copyrights.
The second problem is notability. I am not sure the person you are writing about is notable enough, as Wikipedia defines it, to have an article. We require write-ups in multiple reliable third party sources such as newspapers, magazines, or online publishers to establish notability. New articles about persons or organizations that are not notable are typically speedily deleted.
The third problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about a person you represent is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view.
If you'd like to use the copyrighted content in an article, refer the copyright holder to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to grant us permission to use the content. Alternatively, you could write a new article that does not closely paraphrase the material available online. However you would then still have to abide by the conflict of interest guideline, and even so, there is still a likelihood that the article may be speedy deleted due to lack of notability.
I would advise you to use the Articles for Creation process in the future. This will let you create a draft article that will be at less risk for deletion. You can then submit it for review by other uninvolved editors who can approve it, or send it back to you for revisions. Good luck. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:32, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Drm310, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 18,511 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.
  • Some editors are committing to work specifically on patrolling new pages on 15 July. If you have not reviewed new pages in a while, this might be a good time to be involved. Please remember that quality of patrolling is more important than quantity, that the speedy deletion criteria should be followed strictly, and that ovetagging for minor issues should be avoided.

Technology update:

  • Several requests have been put into Phabractor to increase usability of the New Pages Feed and the Page Curation toolbar. For more details or to suggest improvements go to Wikipedia:Page Curation/Suggested improvements
  • The tutorial has been updated to include links to the following useful userscripts. If you were not aware of them, they could be useful in your efforts reviewing new pages:

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 03:48, 14 July 2017 (UTC)

Additional Questions on Draft:Wyold

Hello, Thank you very much for your quick response on my draft of my Wytold entry. I knew that I could not post copyrighted material on Wikipedia, but I was actually unaware that my biography was copyrighted!

I would be happy to write a different more generic and simplified account of my accomplishments/history, but I want to double check about notability first: I thought that these accomplishments would meet the notability requirement:

- As noted on IMDB, I was a composer for "Blood Brother", winner of Best US Documentary Film Award and Audience Choice Award in the 2013 Sundance Film Festival and 2015 EMMY-nominee for Outstanding Music and Sound. - Also on IMDB, I was a composer for "New Chefs on the Block," winner of the Audience Award at the 2017 Cinequest film festival and screened in many other festivals - As you mentioned the factor of being written about in newspapers, my concerts with the National Symphony Orchestra and my frequent collaborator Christylez Bacon (who has a Wikipedia entry) have been reviewed in the Washington Post here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/style/wp/2015/01/11/nso-hits-the-club-and-scores/?utm_term=.e01e6da8f6f1 - My recent album, "Fireflies, Fairies & Squids", placed in the Top Ten of the RMR World Music Radio Chart for 13 weeks in a row, with “Giant Squids” at #1 for 6 weeks

I won't take your time with any other accomplishments at this point, as I believe these three would most directly relate to your concerns about notability. But if these do not help me meet the notability requirement - can you please let me know at which point a film composer can generally be deemed sufficiently notable? Is there a certain number of titles that need to be scored, radio plays, or articles written?

Thank you so much for your time and help! Wytold — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wytold (talk • contribs) 11:10, 18 July 2017 (UTC)

NPR

Hello. I'm just letting you know I have declined a CSD you posted on Shiwam Kumar Sriwastaw for two reasons: incorrect criterion, and too fast tagging of a nascent new article. Please understand that accuracy rather than speed of patrolling is essential. For more information please read WP:NPP. Thanks. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 03:30, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

While I concede that my tagging was too hasty, the page had already been twice deleted as A7 with even less content, so I believe my criterion was valid. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 03:56, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

MT Finance

Hi Drm310,

Thank you for your comment about MT Finance's Wikipedia page.

It is correct, I am not receiving any compensation for writing a page about them. I have recently started researching the bridging finance industry and MT Finance are pretty much the most successful in the sector.

I wanted to show my eagerness for working in the industry by creating a profile for them, however, please appreciate that my experience with Wikipedia content creation is very limited.

Seeing that MT Finance win the biggest awards ever year and recently sold a deal worth £125 million and have been mentioned in the press, I believe that they are worthy of their own Wikipedia page.

Personally, I would like to hear your thoughts on this.

Thank you,

Daniel

I suggest that you also address the same concern that was raised at the Conflict of interest noticeboard. Replying there help help allay any suspicions that you are representing clients.
You should make contact with Curb Safe Charmer, the editor who reviewed and declined your draft. I will review it when I have more time; in the meantime, have a look at Wikipedia's notability criteria for companies, if you haven't done so already. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:52, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Templates?

Hi, I noticed you'd left a message on Kitshouse1's talk page with what looks to be some sort of custom template. If it is indeed a template, would you mind sharing it here? I think I'd be able to use it in many copyright cases I run into. Thanks, /wiae /tlk 19:37, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

@Wiae: Hi - the template is {{uw-copyright-org}}. It accepts two optional parameters to include statements about WP:N and WP:COI. I also use it for people writing WP:AUTOBIOs with copyrighted content. I just save it and then edit the standard wording. I'm sure you will find it very useful, as I have. Cheers. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:41, 2 August 2017 (UTC)
Excellent, thank you! It'll come in handy. /wiae /tlk 19:43, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

James R. Fitzgerald speedy deletion bot

Hi Drm310,

I am baffled as to why my article was deleted for copyright infringement, as there is no copyright issue to be found. A bot detected identical text from a legal document pertaining to a case wherein the subject of the page (James R. Fitzgerald) testified as an expert witness. The text was James Fitzgerald's CV, as CVs and other information pertaining to the qualifications of expert witnesses are a matter of both court and public record. The court document cited as the source is also *not* the origin of the text in question, but rather includes it as a reference.

In sum, the page seems to have been deleted for 'infringing' on a source that was in reality just a reference to a document that is not subject to copyright in the first place. Furthermore, the information from James Fitzgerald's CV is used not just with permission, but upon his recommendation. There is no copyright infringement.

Jlw280 (talk) 19:24, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

@Jlw280: I see that you've exchanged messages with RickinBaltimore about this matter. I don't think I have anything useful to add to what you have already discussed. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:31, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, yeah, sorry. I'm new to this and was just spazzing out about the deletion, like it's a personal affront or something. I think I'm set now, though, thanks! Jlw280 (talk) 09:42, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Page deleted/Disclosure of Employment

Hello,

The company page that I submitted was deleted for employment disclosure reasons, but I am not being compensated for my edits. The article was written by an unbiased third party (user fuhvah here on Wikipedia) and is entirely factual. What are the next steps that I can take to make sure the page is approved?

Thank you,

Val ocano (talk) 21:55, 14 August 2017 (UTC)Valerie Ocano 8/14/17

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Drm310, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 16,991 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a a day.

Technology update:

  • Rentier has created a NPP browser in WMF Labs that allows you to search new unreviewed pages using keywords and categories.

General project update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation Community Tech team is working with the community to implement the autoconfirmed article creation trial. The trial is currently set to start on 7 September 2017, pending final approval of the technical features.
  • Please remember to focus on the quality of review: correct tagging of articles and not tagbombing are important. Searching for potential copyright violations is also important, and it can be aided by Earwig's Copyvio Detector, which can be added to your toolbar for ease of use with this user script.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 20:33, 24 August 2017 (UTC)

Paul Solomon

Thanks for you comment here [1]. I feel for them, but I don't think there is anything else we can suggest other than than WP:RS/N. The content is not something OTRS has a place in, and it's not a BLP issue (although some of the material they want to add and some of their comments may be). I didn't even bother telling them how to prove their identity (actually identities) since it wouldn't have helped with the content issue, just in helping show their good faith.

Unfortunately, i see that they have now been given a Not Here block. Seems somewhat harsh to me given that they hadn't made any edits since the exchange on my talk page. I would have waited to see, but to be fair, this is exactly what they were blocked for last time. Meters (talk) 18:05, 30 August 2017 (UTC)

Question regarding employment at Usdan Summer Camp

Hi-

I work for Usdan and it is a paid position, but I was not hired nor am I paid specifically to update the Wikipedia page. The paid notification that you want me to put on my page states that I am getting paid to update the page. Are there other options besides that one that I can use? I certainly don't want to violate any terms. Lrwatson (talk) 14:44, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

@Lrwatson: This is a somewhat murky question and I'm going to open a discussion at the Conflict of interest noticeboard to solicit the opinions of other editors. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:18, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

User page edits

Drm310. I mistakenly posted there thinking it was the talk page. Thanks for the heads up. Jsslee (talk) 16:07, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

@Jsslee: No problem. Thanks for the clarification. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:10, 18 September 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Drm310, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 14304 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • Currently there are 532 pages in the backlog that were created by non-autoconfirmed users before WP:ACTRIAL. The NPP project is undertaking a drive to clear these pages from the backlog before they hit the 90 day Google index point. Please consider reviewing a few today!

Technology update:

  • The Wikimedia Foundation is currently working on creating a new filter for page curation that will allow new page patrollers to filter by extended confirmed status. For more information see: T175225

General project update:

  • On 14 September 2017 the English Wikipedia began the autoconfirmed article creation trial. For a six month period, creation of articles in the mainspace of the English Wikipedia will be restricted to users with autoconfirmed status. New users who attempt article creation will now be redirected to a newly designed landing page.
  • Before clicking on a reference or external link while reviewing a page, please be careful that the site looks trustworthy. If you have a question about the safety of clicking on a link, it is better not to click on it.
  • To keep up with the latest conversation on New Pages Patrol or to ask questions, you can go to Wikipedia talk:New pages patrol/Reviewers and add it to your watchlist.

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:16, 19 September 2017 (UTC)

No! I am not getting paid for posting this info

Hello, as a reply to your message - I am not getting paid for posting this info about an exam. And I am not in any way connected to this exam. I just wish to give out the information about a national level scholarship exam that can help kids achieve their dreams.

Samani.khushbu (talk) 04:36, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

@Samani.khushbu: I have found off-wiki evidence which suggests that you may be employed by a business connected to this exam. Wikipedia's policy on outing forbids me from disclosing the information here. However, given what I have seen, I am not entirely convinced that you have no professional connection to this topic.
Please review Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide and ensure that you either 1) edit topics where you have no personal or professional involvement, or 2) disclose any involvement with a topic prior to editing its article. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:20, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

I have unreviewed a page you curated

Hi, I'm Atlantic306. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Shahnaz Sumi, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you.

Atlantic306 (talk) 21:50, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks

Well, Thank you for reminding me and warning me from the writing about myself, i don't know if is bad or opposing the rules of Wikipedia DRKLY2760 (talk) 16:38, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

@DRKLY2760: We strongly discourage people from writing about themselves, because they cannot be objective judges of their own notability. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:03, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Adding

But should i Delete the user page or the article that speaking about me! Sincerly DRKLY2760 DRKLY2760 (talk) 16:39, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

@DRKLY2760: Both have already been deleted. You are welcome to put a small amount of personal information on your user page, but be sure to stay within the guidelines of what is allowed. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:07, 23 September 2017 (UTC)

Robert Mukes page

Thank you so much. I'm at a loss of how to prevent this person with malicious intent. They're anonymous and keep changing their IP location, but are making the same edits from all locations so it's obvious it's the same person resubmitting the false, slanderous information repeatedly. This is very stressful and I'm new here and need help combating this. 1974bug (talk) 17:43, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@1974bug: Vandalism is an unfortunate fact of life on Wikipedia, since anyone is free to edit articles. Persistent vandalism can be dealt with through a number of escalating measures. It might take several hours for the administrators to process my request for page protection, as there is a queue. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:55, 27 September 2017 (UTC)


Thank You + 2 Questions

Thank you for your insight on the paid disclosure portion for my article. I have inserted the mandatory disclosure at the top of the article and on the my user:talk page. What further steps do I need to take? Can I now resubmit the article with the disclosure? SMITHGuyTy (talk) 20:53, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

@SMITHGuyTy: You've made errors on how the templates are used. I will explain their use and at the same time fix them.
  1. {{Paid}} goes on your user page, User:SMITHGuyTy.
  2. {{Connected contributor}} goes on the talk page of the draft article. The |otherlinks= field is used to point to the link where you made your paid editing disclosure.
Can you explain who or what Ashley Stuart is? It was in your original paid disclosure but I don't know what it refers to.
The proper disclosures are now in place, but another problem remains. You have not demonstrated that this company is notable enough for inclusion in Wikipedia. For this, you must show evidence of significant coverage from reliable sources that are independent of the company. The company itself can't claim to be notable; it is only notable if enough other writers, with no connection to it, have written about it.
You've used mostly references to the company's own website or those of its affiliates. While those are valid primary sources, they are not sufficient to establish notability. You have also cited Wikipedia as a source, and that is invalid. Wikipedia articles are not considered reliable unless they are backed up by citing reliable sources. Confirm that these sources support the content, then use them directly. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:22, 27 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi @Drm310: Thank you a bunch for editing my mandatory disclosure. I have researched added independent sources to meet the notability requirements. They are cited in the References section. Your feedback is most appreciated. Please let me know if and where I can make improvements. Ashley is the one who asked me to create the article. She is my direct superior so I thought her name would go in the "client" field from the template for paid disclosure. Thank you! SMITHGuyTy (talk) 23:18, 28 September 2017 (UTC)

Sorry

I didn't notice if removed it's completely by mistake and am learning through that mistake but it will not happen again and I ask you how should I improve my article because i think is very important to have an article as the same like Hotels in London, and other area, Ng'hwebele talk 19:1, 04 October 217 (UTC)

@Ng'hwebele: No problem. You can use your user sandbox for practice if you want.
Many of the notices on your user talk page refer to Wikipedia's notability criteria for businesses. For an article about a business to be accepted, you must show that it is sufficiently notable enough for inclusion. This means that the business must have already received significant coverage by writers from reliable sources that are independent of the business. Because the articles you wrote have been deleted, I don't know what sources you used. I can tell you that a business's official website, social media, or just brief mentions in other sources will not be satisfactory to establish the notability of the business.
I asked you another question on your user talk page, but you did not answer it, so I will ask again. Did any of these hotels pay you to write articles for them? If the answer is yes, then you must disclose this in accordance with Wikipedia's rules on paid editing. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:43, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
No body paid me am doing this for my interest to help Wikipedia glow in Africa where a number of active users is to small and creating the article of Hotels in Dodoma was to show the world how Dodoma looks with its hotels but also to help events organisers to know where to book accommodation, like its in other cities like London Ng'hwebele talk 12:33, 06 October 217 (UTC)
@Ng'hwebele: Thank you for clarifying that. You might find the guide entitled Your first article useful. Creating new articles on Wikipedia can be difficult for new editors, so this guide will assist you in learning the process and expectations when writing a new article. This should help you create a high-quality article with a greater chance of being accepted. Best of luck to you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:08, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you --Drm310 🍁 (talk) I will definitely follow you advice Ng'hwebele talk 14:54, 07 October 2017 (UTC)

Catching the spam

Hey. Now that new editors cannot create articles right away, I'm afraid of them drafting spam then moving then moving it to article space. Looking for better ways to patrol new pages and tag spam. Welcome suggestions.Dlohcierekim (talk) 20:33, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

@Dlohcierekim: Was this a recent policy change? Is there a link to it anywhere? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:03, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
There was a n RfC mid Sept. Must be auto confirmed to create an article. It's an experiment. I'll try to find info.Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:15, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Your_first_article now states 96 hours/10 edits.22:17, 5 October 2017 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trialDlohcierekim (talk) 22:18, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

Article on Company "Inside Secure"

Greetings I am trying to get an entry for "Inside Secure". It seems that any company has an entry so it only make sense to me that a publicly listed company will have an entry. As for the paid work, while i am an employee, my work is technical support and has no relation to this work which i do as a hobby. If a company cant write on itself and no one that paid to do so can, who can do this for me? is there a way i can find an editor that will do the work without being paid?

Thanks Ron Keidar Inside Secure — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ronkeidar (talk • contribs) 19:08, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

@Ronkeidar: Other editors have addressed these questions on your talk page. As they have told you, you are not prohibited from writing about the company you work for, but it is strongly discouraged. As has been suggested, you could create a draft article through WP:Articles for creation, or use WP:Requested articles to request one to be created by a third party.
The difficulty with editors in your situation is a matter of trust. I've encountered editors in the past creating articles about their employers, while claiming to be editing "off the clock" and not as part of their job. The problem is that we have no way to verify this, and often the edits are of such a self-serving nature that it casts doubt on their claim. Even the most well-intentioned editors writing about their employers are subject to unconscious biases that will impair their ability to write from the required neutral point of view.
My advice is that if you're paid by a company and you're writing about it, consider yourself a paid editor. Declaring yourself as such will remove any mistrust about your intentions. Good luck. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:15, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

New Page Reviewer Newsletter

Hello Drm310, thank you for your efforts reviewing new pages!

Backlog update:

  • The new page backlog is currently at 12,878 pages. We have worked hard to decrease from over 22,000, but more hard work is needed! Please consider reviewing even just a few pages a day.
  • We have successfully cleared the backlog of pages created by non-confirmed accounts before ACTRIAL. Thank you to everyone who participated in that drive.

Technology update:

  • Primefac has created a script that will assist in requesting revision deletion for copyright violations that are often found in new pages. For more information see User:Primefac/revdel.

General project update:

If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, go here. TonyBallioni (talk) 17:47, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Follow up

Hi Drm310, per your request, I am not paid or compensated for writing articles in Wikipedia. I work on technology, I am also using Wikipedia a lot and i feel wired that Wikipedia does not have an entry on my company. I understand that the system is very suspicious on such advances as people would try to promote their agenda. So I ask if someone can work with me and be the unbiased editor. Also there was a request to disclose my employment, so i shared a link to my LinkedIn web page as i find it more authentic and committing than writing on my user page.

for example, a much smaller company like Mocana get an article

Ron Ronkeidar (talk) 00:12, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

User talk:RobinJenssen

Beyond removing it, she has ignored paid notice. My reflex is to block, but I think I should mention it to you instead. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 22:43, 1 November 2017 (UTC)

At the very least, it shows bad faith and an unwillingness to cooperate. I'll bet good money that the CU reveals that it's one person trying to conceal their promo editing tracks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:13, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
You must be Claire. Clairvoyant! -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 05:34, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Disclosure of employment / speedy deletion

Hello Drm310. I read your message and can confirm I am not getting paid and do not have a financial stake in adding the page I created Eploy - which has subsequently been removed after your recommendation for a speedy deletion. I felt the page did meet the wiki guidelines and was not promotional did not have a COI or was not a paid advocacy. So i do believe you are mistaken as I can categorically state that I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. Yes, i'm new to wiki and so yes my edits and additions may make the odd mistakeRachel at eploy (talk) 10:20, 7 November 2017 (UTC)

thsi is interesting

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Stand Atlantic has a lot of new use participation. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 17:18, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

@Dlohcierekim: Agreed, looks like WP:CANVAS to me... --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:30, 14 November 2017 (UTC)

ToolBox Project

Please provide the deleted content so I can improve it and comply with Wikipedia guidelines. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=ToolBox_Project&action=edit

Stevepiercy (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2017 (UTC)Stevepiercy

@Stevepiercy: I am not an administrator, so I cannot do this myself. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion and enter the name of the article to request the deleted text. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:25, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Drm310. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)

A goat for you!

Thank you for reviewing my case concerning Eric Thompson (comedian and magician)'s copyrighting laws. The information you provided is very helpful, and it is nice to hear from someone on the submission (I'm very stressed about getting it right.)

Atnow24 (talk) 21:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you Atnow24. Lots of people have gotten my goat before, but this is the first time someone has gotten me a goat! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:35, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Drm310/Archive_13&oldid=813848295"