User talk:Jaguirre2192

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Jaguirre2192, 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 René González Sehwerert, 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:

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! BethNaught (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of René González Sehwerert[edit]

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 René González Sehwerert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article or image appears to be a clear copyright infringement. This article or image appears to be a direct copy from http://www.thecuban5.org/who-are-the-cuban-5/rene-gonzalez-sehwerert/. 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. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — 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 or image 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 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. BethNaught (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ways to improve René González Sehwerert[edit]

Hi, I'm Xcia0069. Jaguirre2192, thanks for creating René González Sehwerert!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This needs a lot more references and neutral viewpoint to be a proper Wikipedia article

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse. Xcia0069 (talk) 18:09, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of René González Sehwerert[edit]

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 René González Sehwerert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), web content or organised event, 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. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about 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, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:45, 22 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Duncan Crabtree-Ireland moved to draftspace[edit]

An article you recently created, Duncan Crabtree-Ireland, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources. (?) Information that can't be referenced should be removed (verifiability is of central importance on Wikipedia). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. When you feel the article meets Wikipedia's general notability guideline and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:19, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

please explain why sagaftra.org is not a 'reliable, independent source' Jaguirre2192 (talk) 22:25, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It can scarcely be independent, since you say that he "has served as the Deputy National Executive Director and General Counsel for SAG-AFTRA". JBW (talk) 23:36, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've provided several other sources that back the same information Jaguirre2192 (talk) 02:39, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023[edit]

Hello, Jaguirre2192. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. JBW (talk) 23:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is almost never suitable to copy content from another web site to Wikipedia, for more than one reason, the most important being copyright. When you post anything to Wikipedia you release it for anyone in the world to reuse it, either unchanged or modified in any way whatever, subject to attribution to Wikipedia. It is very rare that the owner of a web site licenses content for such very free reuse, and in those few occasions when they do so, we require proof of the fact. We don't assume that content is freely licensed on the unsubstantiated say so of just anyone who comes along and creates a Wikipedia account. Certainly we can't accept text previously published on a web site which has a copyright notice saying "all rights reserved", as in the case of material you have posted JBW (talk) 23:33, 8 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

the material you're referring to was copied verbatim from a SAG-AFTRA press release, so it's not copyrighted by the media outlet Jaguirre2192 (talk) 02:38, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

furthermore, why was the article deleted instead of moved to draft so it could be fixed? please explain Jaguirre2192 (talk) 02:49, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Press releases are normally intended to be available for their text to be copied and re-published, in order to publicise or promote the subjects they are written about. However, for a press release to be issued with the intention that anyone anywhere in the world can reuse its content either as it is or changed in any way whatsoever, and do so for any purpose whatsoever, is not usual. For example, the issuers of a press release might well object if text from it were modified to become heavily critical of their client, amounting to an attack on the client. If this is an exceptional case where the material really has been licensed for such free use, then I'm not sure how we were supposed to know that: as far as I can see you didn't say so, let alone provide evidence that it is. As I explained above, we need evidence that it is so: we don't assume that material is licensed for free re-use without evidence. It's actually quite straightforward: if you got the text from a source which explicitly states that it is available for free reuse, then you must know what that source is, so you can easily say so; if you didn't get it from such a source then it shouldn't be here.
I am somewhat puzzled by your question "why was the article deleted instead of moved to draft so it could be fixed". As you know, the article was moved to a draft, and you just created it as an article again.
Wikipedia policy is that copyright-infringing material should be deleted immediately, not kept in a draft, or anywhere else. JBW (talk) 13:52, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]