User talk:Renée Gull

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Renée Gull, 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 User:Renée Gull/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

Article development
Standard layout
Lead section
The perfect article
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

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, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Renée Gull/sandbox[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 User:Renée Gull/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 deleted 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (December 19)[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 DoubleGrazing 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:

Pure WP:ADMASQ. It may be possible to create an article on this subject, but it should be for the purposes of information, not promotion.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Renée Gull/sandbox and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Renée Gull! Having an article draft 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

December 2022[edit]

Hello Renée Gull. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:Renée Gull. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Renée Gull|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, do not edit further until you answer this message. DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:37, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DoubleGrazing,

I work with communication at this company called Lyras, and was asked to create a wiki page. However, I did not mean to create a subjective article, I think I was just too fast to use some of our existing content, which, in hindsight, I realize sounds advertisement-like. I have now written a fresh text, where I have had focus on sounding neutral og fact-based. All I want is to create a page of the most basics facts about our company's technology, so people can look it up. Can you please allow me to try again?

Thank you in advance and Happy New Year.

Kind regards,

Renée Renée Gull (talk) 13:42, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, and happy new year to you, too!

Thank you for your response. Given what you say, the first thing you need to do is to formally declare your conflict of interest (COI) and paid editing as per the instructions posted earlier in this 'December 2022' section. Please do that ASAP, and before any other editing, so that you don't get blocked for undisclosed COI/paid.

You can then create a new draft. (You might even be able to get the deleted draft 'refunded' if you contact the deleting administrator, but don't get your hopes up too much, as promotional drafts may not always be restored.) You must then submit the draft for AfC pre-publication review, as indeed you did with your earlier draft, rather than publishing it yourself, due to your COI.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:05, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Renée Gull, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Renée Gull|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Renée Gull: Please also realize that a company isn't entitled to have a Wikipedia article just because it exists. To qualify for a Wikipedia article, the company must be considered notable by Wikipedia's definition. This means that the company must have already received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the company. We have no interest in what a company wishes to say about itself. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:45, 2 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Raslysation (January 7)[edit]

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

Neologisms are not considered suitable for Wikipedia unless they receive substantial use and press coverage; this requires strong evidence in independent, reliable, published sources. Links to sites specifically intended to promote the neologism itself do not establish its notability.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Is this about the company or the process?

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Raslysation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F (bark • sniff) 01:58, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AngusWOOF

First of all, thank you for your swift review.

The page is about both the company and the process – is that not possible? I could change the title to Lyras A/S, but the essence of the company is the treatment method raslysation, so you can't really seperate the two.

I cannot see why the “neologism” doesn’t live up to your requirements; it has received substantial use and press coverage. You can see it mentioned in all the listed articles (businesswire, foodengineering, labiotech, dairyreporter, Aalborg University (which has been named Europe’s leading university in engineering) etc.)

These sites and newspapers are all in-depth, reliable, secondary and strictly independent of the subject.

Not to be rude, but this page is about a more sustainable way of doing pasteurization. It should be available on Wikipedia. Raslysation is a treatment method that has achieved much acclaim and a long list of awards (which I cannot write on the page itself, as it would sound promotional). It is used by huge companies such as Arla Foods and Novozymes. Enlisting a Wikipedia page about it is not only in Lyras’ interest, but in the interest of the green transition of the food industry.

I get what you are doing – you want Wikipedia to be a neutral space of objective, free information – but why can’t this page be a part of that? It is about green innovation and engineering.

We are all in a hurry to turn this negative impact of the food industry around, so why waste time on rigid protocols, when this page is indeed notable and backed by reliable sources.

I wish to write a neutral text, informing people from the industry (and others) about this technology, which is already experiencing success around the world.

Please try and understand that this page is as notable, if not much more, than many of the already listed on Wikipedia.

Renée Renée Gull (talk) 07:41, 9 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Raslysation[edit]

Hello, Renée Gull. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Raslysation, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 02:03, 9 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Raslysation[edit]

Hello, Renée Gull. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Raslysation".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:58, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Liz. Can you please help me get started again. I don't want my article to be called my name, I want it to be "raslysation" which is the name of Lyras' technology. Now, you may not be an expert in the food manufactoring industry, but we have received a lot of recognition worldwide for our pasteurization replacement, raslysation. You can try googling it. We save liquid producers 60-90% energy and 60-80% water and I'm not saying that to sound promotional but for you to understand that we need to spread this message and make it easy for producers to look for us on platforms like Wikipedia. Our company is all about sustainability and for that reason, we should have a place on this platform! I have understood the rules, and I am ready to just state the neutral facts about our technology. I just want to create a page because, judging from all the attention we are receiving, it makes no sense for us to not be on Wikipedia. 91.133.35.159 (talk) 11:15, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]