User talk:Maselrich

Welcome!

Hello, Maselrich, and welcome to Wikipedia!

Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask at the help desk, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or or by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Worldbruce (talk) 00:19, 16 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting started
Introduction Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia How to edit a page Intuitive guide to Wikipedia
Finding your way around
Table of contents Directories and indexes Department directory
Editing articles
How to develop an article Simplified Manual of Style

Getting help
Frequently asked questions Cheatsheet Our new user help forum, the Teahouse The Help Desk, for more advanced questions Help pages Article Wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
How you can help
Community Portal Join a WikiProject Follow Wikipedia etiquette Practice civility Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Draft:Dioxide Materials

Got your email, but on my phone, so I'm responding here...

The setup for the article isn't half bad (especially compared to some other first articles). You are certainly using the technical parts of the wikiscripting better than most.

The primary question is 'How many of the entries in "Independent Press Coverage" talk about your company, Dioxide Materials?' Not generally about the Carbon Dioxide Electrolyzer technology and preferably not in an overly technical manner about Sustanion withough mentioning more than who makes it. If you've got two or three of those, then you should be fine. https://www.newscientist.com/article/mg22129593-400-dont-waste-co2-turn-it-into-bottles-and-glue/ is a good start, if we can find another couple at that level, we should be good.

Do you have any competitors that have Wikipedia articles about them to use for a model?

Two negatives off the top of my head. The "R in a circle" isn't used in Wikipedia generally. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks and the Analysts Reports don't belong.

We'll keep plugging away.Naraht (talk) 01:40, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dioxide Materials (March 8)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

You'll need to remove the registered trademark symbols before consideration for creation can advance. The section "independent press coverage" seems like an effort to prove notability, but is not encyclopedic.

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:Dioxide Materials 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:Dioxide Materials, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

Chetsford (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Maselrich! 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! Chetsford (talk) 17:48, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Dioxide Materials has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Dioxide Materials. Thanks! Worldbruce (talk) 05:41, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Elaborate on connection

Hello Maselrich. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Draft:Dioxide Materials, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Maselrich. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Maselrich|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Worldbruce (talk) 05:44, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No payment was received

I declared a conflict of interest because I own Dioxide Materials, but I did not receive any compensation for creating this article.

BTW - I do not know what independent sources are. So for example, ARPA-E funded some work at Dioxide Materials. They wrote a description of the implications of the work without any input from Dioxide Materials. How is this not independent?

Maselrich (talk) 13:30, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dioxide Materials (April 4)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by David.moreno72 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere 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, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Most of this article is not about the subject. Far too much primary references.

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:Dioxide Materials 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:Dioxide Materials, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
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.

David.moreno72 12:15, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dioxide Materials has been accepted

Dioxide Materials, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Legacypac (talk) 10:25, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]