User talk:CBottacin21

This is CBottacin21's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: European Centre for Living Technology (February 24)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Velella was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Sources are all website of the organization or strongly affiliated sources. Needs several wholly independent and reliable sources discussing this organization

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:European Centre for Living Technology and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:European Centre for Living Technology, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Velella ^{Velella Talk} 14:26, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, CBottacin21! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Velella ^{Velella Talk} 14:26, 24 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: European Centre for Living Technology (March 2)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by NoahDavid771 was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This article is written in the style of "we" which says enough.

Noah!^💬 19:09, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi CBottacin21! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:32, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, CBottacin21. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page European Centre for Living Technology, 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 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 WP:Spam);
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. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 04:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of European Centre for Living Technology

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 European Centre for Living Technology requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://www.unive.it/pag/17725/ and https://www.unive.it/pag/23664/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material 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 use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy 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 "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 deleted 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:27, 27 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for persistently editing contrary to the policy on promotional editing, the guidelines on conflict of interest, and the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use. Almost all of us, when we start editing Wikipedia, know little or nothing about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, so nobody can be blamed for starting out doing things that are contrary to policies and guidelines that they don't know about. However, continuing to do the same things after being told about the relevant policies and guidelines is a different matter..

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Unblock page

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

CBottacin21 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello, we are a research centre in Ca' Foscari University of Venice and we are trying to write ECLT European Centre for Living Technology article but it has been deleted. We are manager also of the web site so we have all the rights o publicate text copied from there; could you please tell us how can we fix the deletion page? Thank you very much CBottacin21 (talk) 07:30, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You are confused, Wikipedia isn't for you to promote your research centre. See WP:NOT, WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. Yamla (talk) 10:25, 29 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Reply to your email

Wikipedia does not serve the purpose of providing a platform for organisations to publicise themselves or to promote the image of themselves that they would like to be known. You may believe that your organisation is "a dynamical network of excellence" (whatever that means) but Wikipedia is not the place to tell the world that you think your organisation is wonderful; that is for your own web site to do. There is no question of unblocking your account so that you can use Wikipedia as a free service to promote your organisation and its work, no matter how much your director cares about doing so.
You say that what you posted "doesn't violate any copyright" because you and your colleagues wrote the content of the web site from which you copied text to Wikipedia. Actually, that is not very important, because the material you posted is totally unacceptable as promotional, whether it infringes copyright or not. Nevertheless, I shall attempt to make it clear why posting the material violates Wikipedia's copyright policy. Unfortunately, we don't accept that material has copyright release on the say-so of just anyone who chooses to create a Wikipedia account, for more than one reason. Firstly, there are thousands of people who come to Wikipedia and lie about who they are. (I am not suggesting that you are doing so, I am just explaining why our policies are the way they are.) Secondly, there are people who in good faith believe that they are acting correctly in respect of copyright, but in fact aren't. There are many ways that can happen, but I will give just one example. We get people coming to Wikipedia and posting material copied from the web site of their business or organisation, thinking that they are authorised by their employer to post that material for view only on Wikipedia, unaware that by posting their material to Wikipedia they are giving permission for it to be used by anyone in the world, for any purpose whatever, as it is or modified in any way whatever, subject to attribution to Wikipedia. There are occasions when an organisation really does intend to license their material under such broad terms, but those occasions are far less common than occasions when there is no such intention, and they are not willing to see their material published elsewhere, with change made to the text which cast their organisation in a very different light than they intended. Your web site says "Reproduction of website contents is subject to prior consent of the holders of the rights, and is exclusively for personal and non-commercial purposes". We cannot assume that the particular material has been given exemption from that without clear proof. JBW (talk) 10:11, 30 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]