User talk:Mnemonicbloom

This is Mnemonicbloom's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 11)

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

facebook and YouTube are not reliable sources.

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:Mnemonicbloom/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.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Mnemonicbloom! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 16:43, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

June 2025

Hello Mnemonicbloom. 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:Mnemonicbloom. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Mnemonicbloom|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) 16:45, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Subject: COI and Paid Editing Clarification

Hello [[User:331dot]],

Thank you for your note. I want to clarify that I am not being paid in any form, directly or indirectly, to create or edit this article. I disclosed a personal/professional connection to the subject transparently in the draft’s top section and have done my best to follow Wikipedia’s policies in good faith. I am not a paid advocate—just someone who believes the subject meets notability guidelines based on multiple independent sources, including magazine features and industry awards.

Please let me know if there's a more appropriate way to handle this disclosure. I’m happy to learn and adjust.

Best regards,

Mnemonicbloom (talk) 17:04, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What do you mean by "professional connection"? 331dot (talk) 17:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your follow-up. Luca Volpe is my mentor, and I have a personal (not professional) connection to him. I am not being paid or compensated in any way for drafting an article. I’ve updated my COI statement both on my user page and on the article’s talk page to reflect this transparently. In a few minutes or within the hour, I will remove all Facebook and YouTube references as advised and am reviewing all other sources for compliance with Wikipedia's standards.

I welcome independent editorial review and am approaching this in good faith and with respect for Wikipedia’s neutrality guidelines.

== COI Statement ==

I have a personal connection to Luca Volpe, who is my mentor. I am not being paid or compensated in any way for drafting an article about him. I am not a paid editor. This connection has been transparently disclosed here and on the article’s talk page. I welcome independent editorial review and feedback in the spirit of Wikipedia's neutral point of view. Mnemonicbloom (talk) 17:19, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your clarification. I think a mentor-mentee relationship could theoretically be a form of "paid editing" as the "payment" is the advice/knowledge your mentor gives you, which you use to your benefit in your life. However, your statement is likely sufficient in terms of disclosure requirements. 331dot (talk) 17:22, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note that you ceasing work on the topic for now doesn't mean the COI goes away. It's best for your COI disclosure to remain, at least on this page, if not your user page. 331dot (talk) 19:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Sarsenet. An edit that you recently made seemed to be generated using a large language model (an "AI chatbot" or other application using such technology). Text produced by these applications can be unsuitable for an encyclopedia, and output must be carefully checked. Your edit may have been reverted. If you want to practice editing, please use your sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Sarsenet•he/they•(talk) 19:37, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: User:Mnemonicbloom/sandbox has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at User:Mnemonicbloom/sandbox. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:16, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (June 11)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: 404 error messages all a zero and indication of any notability.

Theroadislong (talk) 18:02, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Added note to clarify I’ve stepped away from involvement.

Stepping Away

I am no longer involved in any article about Luca Volpe. I made good faith efforts to follow policy and now fully step back. I welcome neutral editors to continue as appropriate. Mnemonicbloom (talk) 19:05, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]