User talk:Danbrotherston

Reply[edit]

Welcome, and thank you for declaring that you do not have a conflict of interest. Please read the guidance below:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to an organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what a company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

Most of your text was unsourced. The supposed references you did give were its own website, an article written by Trapani, and GitHub, a repository that anyone can post to. These are not independent third-party sources, as required here
I can't see where in your text you are indicating how this meets the notability criteria linked above

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

Much of your text is unsourced and often promotional opinions, a simple, human and machine readable format that one might naturally use... These tools are advertised as allowing more convenient and user-friendly

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections, and it's pointless when you are linking to a site you have used as a ref.

You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:11, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will you not re-instate my draft so I am able to address these concerns then?

The work is entirely my own, not copied from anywhere. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:08, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak Danbrotherston (talk) 18:09, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't accusing you of plagiarism, that's just general guidance. I'm about to log off for the evening now, I'll look to see what's salvageable tomorrow. Bear in mind that whatever is restored, it will not be accepted without independent third-party sources supporting evidence of notability as linked in my initial reply. You could work on that in the interim, and see if restoration is worthwhile Jimfbleak - talk to me? 18:21, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You cited that rule, you clearly thought it was applicable to my work.

Don't bother...I'm not interested in contributing further to Wikipedia. I can certainly see why you folks cannot recruit new editors.

Good day. Danbrotherston (talk) 18:25, 19 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]