User talk:PhilS223

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Welcome[edit]

Hello, PhilS223, and Welcome to Wikipedia!   

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Need help?

How you can help:

Additional tips...

PhilS223, good luck, and have fun. — jmcgnh(talk) (contribs) 21:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to write articles that won't be rejected[edit]

{{sup|(Part of a larger guide covering issues new users face):

If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything that is not you or something you are connected to, here are the steps you should follow:

1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.
2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find. Google Books is a good resource for this. Also, while search engine results are not sources, they are where you can find sources. Just remember that they need to be professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources.
3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.
4) Summarize those sources left after step 3, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer. Make sure this summary is just bare statement of facts, phrased in a way that even someone who hates the subject can agree with.
5) Combine overlapping summaries where possible (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports), repeating citations as needed.
6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.
7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.
8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 3 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion.

If you are writing about yourself, or someone or something you are connected with (such as a friend, family member, or your business), the following steps are different:

0) If the subject really was notable, you wouldn't need to write the article. Remember that articles are owned by the Wikipedia community as a whole, not the article subject or the article author. If you do not want other people to write about you, then starting an article about yourself is a bad idea.
8a) If the article is accepted, never edit it again. Instead, make edit requests on the article's talk page.
8b) If the article is rejected, there will be a reason given. Read it carefully and closely. If there are links in the reason, open them and read those pages.

Ian.thomson (talk) 21:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Ian.thomson! The draft I submitted is about me so I guess I cannot edit it? PhilS223 (talk) 21:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Once it's approved, you should not edit it. If it's not approved, I'd recommend starting over and following these instructions exactly. The goal is to have a summary of three or more reliable sources that are specifically and primarily about you but completely independent of you -- nothing else to distract from the proof of notability. Other sources (ones that are primarily about other stuff, ones connected to you) can be added via edit request after it's approved. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for the kind explanation. I am really grateful for the help I have received so far.

Re: Draft:Phil Sokowicz[edit]

connection[edit]

With some reading, I understand that "JaaS" and "a legal tech company" are nearly the same concept, i.e. one runs the other. In the article text this is not clear. (To reply, click 'edit', and add your message at the end of the section.) --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

photo[edit]

Do you have a photo of yourself that you took? This can be added to the article. --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ISM language note[edit]

The article de:International School of Management (ISM) has no English version. In the article, could you add "(in German)" after the link to the German Wikipedia page? --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ISM translation[edit]

Would you like to create the English page for ISM? It does not have to be long, just two or three most important paragraphs would suffice. --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gryllida, thank you very much for your kind explanations. I would really love to create the English page for ISM. I studied there so I am not sure if I can write for it. Could you be kind enough to help me with my page? Thanks, Phil

There are two ways to make it: the article wizard, or the translation portal. --Gryllida (talk) 20:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Phil Sokowicz (April 27)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy 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 people). 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.
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.
Sulfurboy (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, PhilS223! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability[edit]

You are probably not notable by our peculiar definition of notability. If you are not notable, there is nothing you can do on-wiki to keep us from deleting the article. Please see WP:AMOUNT. But maybe I'm wrong! If so, you can ensure that we keep the article by finding appropriate references. This is easy to mess up, so take a look at Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). -Arch dude (talk) 04:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Arch dude, thank you for the message. I do have some sources like this- https://www.theselfemployed.com/article/phil-sokowicz-educating-people-about-the-life-insurance-loophole/ mentioning me as per requirement of Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). Do you think this would help? Thanks, Phil

Probably not, unfortunately. A source that is reliable for facts is not necessarily sufficient to establish notability. I don't know anything about selfemployed.com but in general, a "reliable source" is something whose publisher is fairly well-known. You can ask at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Once you find a minimum of 2 (three is better) of these notability-establishing sources, then you will make life easier for reviewers if you explicitly list those sources, and only those sources, in a section on your article's talk page, so the reviewers do not need to wade through all of your sources to find them. Incidentally, if you are getting frustrated by what seems to be a bunch of officious nonsense, please re-read WP:NOT to see what Wikipedia is trying to accomplish. -Arch dude (talk) 16:15, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Arch dude thank you for the kind explanation and the links. But I can't seem to find the draft anymore. Someone has deleted it for "G11: Unambiguous advertising or promotion (CSDH)".PhilS223 (talk) 21:40, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think that was overly harsh. Many experienced Wikipedians (who should know better) get quite irritated when a case of undisclosed paid editing comes to light, and I think you may have encountered this. Your best move now is to let this cool down while trying hard to find unimpeachable sources. Then take the sources to the reliable sources noticeboard to see if those guys agree, and finally come back and write an article in a sandbox (e.g., user:PhilS223/Phil). Please note: I'm afraid that the underlying problem is that you do not yet meet our notability standards, so you should abandon the effort until the larger world notices you. There are more than six billion people in the world, and fewer than 100,000 biographies of living people on Wikipedia. I wish you luck in your future endeavors. -Arch dude (talk) 23:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

April 2020[edit]

Information icon Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, such as at User talk:Sulfurboy‎, (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

  1. Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
  2. With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Putting your name at the end of your message doesn't count. Chris Troutman (talk) 14:35, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you. PhilS223 (talk) 14:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:PhilS223&oldid=954860766"