Jump to content

User talk:Jakemitchelll

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

Your submission at Articles for creation: Idea Usher (June 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 JavaHurricane was: 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.
JavaHurricane 08:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Jakemitchelll! 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! JavaHurricane 08:34, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Idea Usher (June 3)

[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 331dot were: 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.
331dot (talk) 09:50, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Jakemitchelll. 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 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:Jakemitchelll. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Jakemitchelll|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. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 3 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Re: emailed questions

[edit]

Hi Jake, thanks for reaching out.

I see you've noticed the concerns raised in the two declines in your question. Usually, the first step we recommend (after the mandatory disclosure noted above) is to find at least three sources clearly meeting the four inclusion criteria (in-depth, reliable, secondary, strictly independent). (You can find the standard guide at Help:Your first article)

Usually company profiles on company databases like currently used in your draft are a short blurb, with insufficient depth (WP:ORGDEPTH), are not reviewed by an editorial process with any reputation for independent fact checking (WP:RS), often do not provide any analysis, synthesis or interpretation of primary sources (WP:SECONDARY) and commonly use content directly supplied but the company in question (WP:ORGIND).

If you have any further questions about sources, feel free to reach out again either on my talk page, User talk:Alpha3031, or the helpdesk related to this topic, Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. It is usually easier to link to on-wiki resources on Wikipedia. Alpha3031 (tc) 14:18, 4 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]