User talk:AJRyan6of7

This is AJRyan6of7'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: Susan Ericksen (July 5)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Numerous unsourced statements.

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:Susan Ericksen 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.

Greenman (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AJRyan6of7! 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! Greenman (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Susan Ericksen (October 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Spinster300 were:

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.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing 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 Draft:Susan Ericksen 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.

Spinster300 (talk) 17:52, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

David Colacci moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to David Colacci. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources, it is promotional and reads like an advertisement and you may have a possible Conflict of Interest. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:56, 9 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Sorry, that was my mistake, I hadn’t meant to publish yet. AJRyan6of7 (talk) 03:25, 10 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Susan Ericksen (October 31)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Spinster300 was:

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Still highly promotional. Please consider on writing more concise prose that sticks to the facts without any WP:Puffery. Kind regards, Spinster300 (talk) 19:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC).[reply]

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:Susan Ericksen 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.

Spinster300 (talk) 19:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Susan Ericksen (November 2)

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

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:Susan Ericksen 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.

voorts (talk/contributions) 23:26, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, AJRyan6of7. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Draft:Susan Ericksen, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. voorts (talk/contributions) 23:26, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

All of the above also applies to Draft:David Colacci. TL;DR: If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it. Best, voorts (talk/contributions) 23:28, 2 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

See my previous response in relation to the Susan Ericksen article. In the case of David Colacci, I have had no contact with him whatsoever. I created a Wikipedia page for him simply because I was also creating a page for Susan Ericksen and much of the information overlaps. AJRyan6of7 (talk) 01:27, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I do understand that there needs to be a high level of integrity here, and I appreciate that.

I do not believe I have a conflict of interest in this case, but I guess that would depend on the editorial team’s judgment.

I co-host a podcast about the “In Death” book series which Susan Ericksen narrates. Because of this, she has been a guest on the podcast. This is as far as my personal and/or professional connection to her goes.

I do not know her personally and I don’t work for her or her agent in any way. Nor do I personally know or work for the author of this series, nor do I work for MacMillain Publishing. I am not being paid by anyone at all.

I interviewed her for a podcast. I saw here that other audiobook narrators have Wikipedia pages and I thought I would add one for her, since after the interview I had a lot of knowledge about her that I thought would be useful in a Wikipedia article. She has no knowledge at all about my writing a Wikipedia article about her.

So, again, I appreciate the help, and will continue to learn as I go. If my limited interaction with Susan Ericksen is still seen as a conflict of interest, I am happy to amend the article to disclose that. AJRyan6of7 (talk) 01:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I think to be safe, you should declare a conflict of interest regarding Susan Erickson. You should add the following code to the draft talk page, or if you would like, I can add it for you: {{Connected contributor |user=AJRyan6of7 |declared=1183237584 |editedhere=yes}}. voorts (talk/contributions) 20:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Thank you. AJRyan6of7 (talk) 22:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Colacci (November 5)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WikiOriginal-9 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:

Not enough significant, independent coverage.

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:David Colacci 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.

WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 11:22, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]