User talk:Iszilagyi

Your submission at Articles for creation: Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary (July 1)

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

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This appears to be WP:promotion pure and simple, and in all probability undeclared WP:PAID promotion at that – please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion or advocacy of any kind. The content is not written in a neutral encyclopaedic tone, has insufficient citations of independent reliable sources, and contains an interminable unpunctuated (and unreferenced) WP:LAUNDRY list of artist names which would in any case have no place in one of our articles (imagine if we tried to do that for a large collection such as the Hermitage or the Met!).

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:Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Iszilagyi, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:54, 1 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Marguerite Humeau for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Marguerite Humeau is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Marguerite Humeau until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Baum des Lichtes (talk) 06:37, 4 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion and clarification about COI

Hi Iszilagyi. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date indicate that you have a conflict of interest with respect to Marguerite Humeau. I have given you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use above, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. I would request you to please disclose if you have some connection with Marguerite Humeau (friend/ family/client/co-worker/employee/employer or any other personal or professional relationship)? After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Please reply here. Thanks! --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:25, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Answer

I have no connection to Marguerite whatsoever. I have been seeing her work at Manifesta and researched her. I have never met her and I am in NO releationship profesionally or personally with her.

Thank you for your response. However, you edits indicate something totally different. I would like to assure you that declaring COI is essential. It does not impede contributing to Wikipedia. In addition, I would like to let you know about paid contributions. Some Wikipedia editors may be paid by certain clients - for example for managing and keeping up to date their Wikipedia article. This is not forbidden, but our terms of use need to be followed. I would like to know if you have been paid or asked to contribute/update this article? In addition, could you please clarify your relationship with Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary? --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:34, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nor sure why my edit indicate anything different? I was defending deletion, but that seems to be normal for something I think should be up here right? ;) I am actually planning to put up a couple of "newer" artist who I think are missing, but I AM avoiding the ones I actually know for the above reasons. If you have specific doubts, let me know why so I can argue them, as I really do not know Marguerite.

Regarding Thyssen - I am drafting an edit, and did not finish it yet. I have enclosed a "Connected contributor" item already in my new draft.

Ah, this kind of declaration of COI was what I was asking for. However, this "Connected contributor" is not put on the main article. It is usually put on the talk page of the article and a connecting box should be placed on the editor's (in this your) user page. If you don't mind, I can correct this for you. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:45, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure go ahead! Yes - I am only collecting the links and so on to make the article full, so I am not finished with it yet - it is a draft anways for now. Putting together all the sources to verify.

Thank you! I will just do the changes accordingly. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 16:47, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great! Do you need more clarification on Marguerite from me?

Thank you. I have just added the disclosure template to your user page according to our Terms of Use. I am fine with you assurance on Marguerite! Anyway, I will just explain step 2 of the COI thing. The second step is called peer review - similar to academia. This means using the AFC process to create and submit article. Essentially, you can write an article and others will review it to see if it fits Wikipedia's policies. Once the article is published, you need to propose any further changes on the talk page. You can use the Template:Request edit for this purpose - these edits are then answered by experienced editors in good standing. If an editor disagrees with your proposed changes, you may post at our Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard, where other editors can then assess your edit as well (but please do not edit the article directly). If you have any other queries, I would be glad to help out. Thank you. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:07, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh btw, you can sign your posts by typing ~~~~ at the end. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I thought that is not necessary on my own talk. ;) Iszilagyi (talk) 17:11, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, we sign everywhere on Wikipedia haha! Since you creating an article about an organisation, I suggest you can read the following

Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) may be useful. We usually use these guidelines to find out if an article (about a company or organisation) should be worthy of including on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia:Identifying reliable sources These are what we call reliable sources. (For proving notability, we usually need reliable, secondary and independent sources, not connected to the subject)

Both the above are useful to understand the concepts of notability and reliable sources. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:21, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and if any editor requests you for the disclosure, you can simply give them this link User:Iszilagyi as it has the declaration. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 17:23, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well, Lemongirl942, you may be happy to accept that assurance about Marguerite Humeau, but I'm not at all comfortable with it. According to her autobiography, Humeau had an exhibition at "TBA21 Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary – Augarten, Vienna" in 2015. Iszilagyi has – at last – declared his/her paid connection to that institution (a connection which was already clear from this document relating to work done for TBA21 in 2015). The connection with Humeau is too close to be ignored, and the answer to your question specious at best. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Justlettersandnumbers - I had to look it up: Humeau is really associated with TBA - but you are not correct: she had ONE piece in a group show in February 2015: [1] at a time I did no work for TBA. I started working for TBA only with the following show "Ernesto Neto, the Huni Kuin". I have not linked her to TBA in my article - I wasn't even aware of this, and I am sorry, but I do NOT have any relations to her whatsoever nor do I get paid for it. Iszilagyi (talk) 18:35, 5 July 2016 (UTC) To be honest this IS getting a bit frustrating. I have stated the relationship with TBA for the TBA article. I will not put up a declaration for something that is not true. I thought Marguerite would be a great addition and to be honest if you want you will find a second degree of separation from basically ALL the artist in this world. Iszilagyi (talk) 18:48, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Iszilagyi. Good faith demands that I accept your statement, good manners requires that I apologise for having been so insistent on this point: I'm sorry, it seems that I was wrong. I plan to strike my delete rationale from the deletion discussion. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:52, 5 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Iszilagyi. Sorry, I got here a bit late. Justlettersandnumbers was correct in pointing out the issues. COI can be of different types - paid or non-paid. Sometimes, it can happen solely due to affiliation. The key point is transparency. In this case, I will take your word that you did not know that Marguerite had exhibited at the gallery and you have not been paid for it. However, usually the onus lies on the article creator to do due diligence and clarify so that future misunderstandings do not occur. The fact that Marguerite Humeau was once affiliated with the gallery is still considered a COI, although not a paid contribution. Going forward, I can give you an advice. If you create an article, do a small background check and see if the artist was ever affiliated to any of your clients. This doesn't prevent you from creating an article, but stating this fact is important. COI is never a problem if it is managed. I understand that it might be frustrating to you as a new user, but I wanted to explain it to you now rather than later. Should you have any queries you can always ask me. --Lemongirl942 (talk) 05:42, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary

Hello, Iszilagyi. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Thyssen-Bornemisza Art Contemporary".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. 1989 (talk) 09:50, 16 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]