mic_none

User talk:Nickywikip Source: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Nickywikip

November 2024

[edit]

Stop icon You have used sources that are either clearly noted as paid placement, unmarked press releases or marketing content, or blatant fake content farms which house unmarked SEO placement. One of Wikipedia's core policies is that contributions must be verifiable through reliable sources, preferably using inline citations. These sources step far beyond those policies. Please carefully evaluate your references in the future, and ensure that you are in compliance with our mandatory paid editing disclosures. Sam Kuru (talk) 22:32, 2 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Information icon

Hello Nickywikip. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Tomasz Dowbor, 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Nickywikip. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Nickywikip|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. Ca talk to me! 22:54, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ca. I hope you are well. I understand your concern regarding whether the article might be promotional in nature, and I am aware of Wikipedia's guidelines. First of all, I would like to emphasize that I am not receiving any payment for creating this article, nor do I have any professional relationship with the subject. I am from Brazil, and the article was created solely for educational purposes, aiming to explore business figures who are engaged in philanthropic activities in Angola. In this context, I chose to write about the work of Tomasz Dowbor and considered including his profile in the encyclopedia.

Additionally, I apologize for including some references that may not have been entirely suitable, as I was unfamiliar with certain specific adequacy criteria. I appreciate the guidance, and I would particularly like to request a review of the links from the "PressReader" website, which were removed by another editor. I would like to understand better if these references are acceptable, given the notability of the sources. I reiterate my apologies for any possible mistakes and express my desire to contribute to this community constructively and in line with established standards. I am committed to making the necessary adjustments so that this article fully meets the required criteria. Nickywikip (talk) 19:12, 4 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Tomasz Dowbor (November 3)

[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 Ca 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
None of the sources are actually about this businessman. They only discuss his company. The only exception is this source: [1], but it reads very promotional and is likely paid news. Please remove.
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.
Ca talk to me! 22:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Nickywikip! 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! Ca talk to me! 22:53, 3 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]