User talk:MarkBurgess

Welcome![edit]

Hello, MarkBurgess, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Semantic spacetime, 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! David.moreno72 07:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Semantic spacetime[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 Semantic spacetime requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about something invented/coined/discovered by the article's creator or someone they know personally, and 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.

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 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. David.moreno72 07:01, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest editing[edit]

Hello, MarkBurgess. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Mark Burgess (computer scientist), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 08:42, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reply[edit]

Thanks for your message on my talk page. Wikipedia has a clear conflict of interest policy which you should familiarise yourself with. In regards to the page about yourself, you should not be editing that article directly. As stated above, if you think there are inaccuracies or omissions, you should make suggestions on the article's talk page so that other editors can make the changes. You should also make sure you have clearly disclosed your conflicts of interest as advised above. As for the articles about your work, the maintenance tags I have added to Promise theory are to indicate that there are some COI issues and these need to be checked by other editors - this is not saying you cannot contribute, but rather that wikipedia needs to work by consensus rather than people promoting their own work. You comment about promotion and pedagogy is interesting and may indicate a misunderstanding of wikipedia's core goals - wikipedia does not exist to teach per se, and as an encyclopaedia original research is not allowed, rather the content is to be what reliable, secondary third-party sources have said (see WP:RS). So it may be that your work needs time to be commented on by other people in published sources before it can be included here? Cheers, Melcous (talk)

I'm not sure what you're referring to by "nice try" - but the COI policy applies whether to article creation or later editing. Perhaps I should have clarified, but my last sentence above was actually in reference to Semantic spacetime, which you did in fact create. Cheers, Melcous (talk) 09:13, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I get that you are frustrated, but I personally am not the person who nominated Semantic spacetime for deletion, nor am I the person who will decide if it is deleted. I'm just trying to respond to your questions. I think the key misunderstanding is around what wikipedia is for. If you read WP:OR you will see that wikipedia is not a publishing platform of any kind, and in fact it exists only to report/refer to information that has already been published elsewhere. So yes, there are plenty of other platforms where you can publish your work, and many platforms that exist for that specific purpose. Wikipedia doesn't, which doesn't make it wrong or an ass, just clear about its scope. I agree that good information can come directly from experts on topics, and I hope that such people publish their work elsewhere, for many reasons, only one of which is so that down the track this collaborative online encyclopaedia can provide an overview of it and point people to where they can read the expert information straight from the horse's mouth. I wish you the best in your endeavours. Melcous (talk) 09:34, 24 August 2016 (UTC)[reply]