User talk:Eugenioceri

This is Eugenioceri'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: GlitterBeam Radio (December 30)

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 organizations and companies). 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.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:GlitterBeam Radio and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:GlitterBeam Radio, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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) 10:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eugenioceri! Having an article 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) 10:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: GlitterBeam Radio (May 3)

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

Although the subject may be notable in future, it seems to be too soon to demonstrate notability at the moment. The only source which I am certain constitutes significant, independent coverage is the Vanity article. The "G-A-Y’s owner" Canal Street article might count, but this is still not quite enough for me to be certain that this article would pass at AfD (a good rule of thumb is three sources, especially for companies). I suggest waiting for new sources to come out before publishing this article.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:GlitterBeam Radio and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:GlitterBeam Radio, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Toadspike (talk) 16:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Hello Eugenioceri. 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:Eugenioceri. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Eugenioceri|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. Theroadislong (talk) 20:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry! I replied in the wrong section! Thank you for your reply. I am not paid to edit the article in any shape of form. I’m aware of COI as I am a volunteer for the station and I have declared the COI in the page. But the station itself it’s not commercial, and I have not been paid for the edits. I did the edits after the first review as it was said it needed more references and articles, so I did it. So what can I do in this case? I feel a bit lost! Eugenioceri (talk) 21:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey. Look at your user page--I put the correct template there. Theroadislong, yes COI, but not paid. Eugenioceri, it is recommended you not edit the article yourself, but it's in draft space so I don't have much of a problem with it; just keep it neutral. I do see what you need: secondary sources. Good luck. Drmies (talk) 21:09, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Hey, thank you for that. I did declared COI. As per secondary sources, I did put all the articles I could possibly find on google news etc. I get that sometimes the station is “mentioned” but it’s only because in that case the whole article is about things happened or said on air on the station itself. So not sure what else I could put. I did check similar radio stations on Wikipedia to try to get it in a similar way. But thank you to all of you, any help is appreciated! Eugenioceri (talk) 21:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    - Well, if it's not there, it's not there--sad, but that is the way it sometimes is. Without media coverage notability cannot be established--and this is a thing that many Wikipedia users don't always understand. Take care, Drmies (talk) 22:33, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:GlitterBeam Radio has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:GlitterBeam Radio. Thanks! --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: GlitterBeam Radio (May 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Deepfriedokra 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 organizations and companies). 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.

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:GlitterBeam Radio and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:GlitterBeam Radio, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

--Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: GlitterBeam Radio (May 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 331dot 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 organizations and companies). 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:

Resubmitted without any changes.

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:GlitterBeam Radio and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:GlitterBeam Radio, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

331dot (talk) 07:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: GlitterBeam Radio (July 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Missvain 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 organizations and companies). 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:

Hi.

I’m sorry, but the sourcing here isn’t helping the subject meet our General Notability Guidelines nor WP:NCOMPANY. The sourcing here are either primary sources (Canal Street, Varisty, Mux One), passing mentions (Radio Today, Pink News), promotional/press releases (Radio Today, Wisbech Standard, Cambs Times), event announcements.

We need *significant* in-depth coverage (that is independent of the subject - meaning no promotional pieces, government websites, event websites, social media, press releases, paid coverage) in notable major media outlets or by notable publishers about GlitterBeam. Examples: magazine and newspaper reviews and features about GlitterBeam specifically; books or peer-reviewed white papers written ABOUT GlitterBeam; television and radio features ABOUT GlitterBeam.

Frankly, if the subject isn’t passing WP:NCORP they may not be eligible for an encyclopedic article.

Also see WP:RS for additional guidance on what reliable secondary sources are.

If those are available, please improve this submission. If not, then it might not be the right time (WP:TOOSOON) for GlitterBeam to have a Wikipedia article.

I hope you will consider improving existing Wikipedia content about other subjects of interest!

If you have any questions please ask them at WP:TEAHOUSE.

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia!

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:GlitterBeam Radio and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not make any further changes to 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.

Missvain (talk) 15:21, 26 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:GlitterBeam Radio

Hello, Eugenioceri. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:GlitterBeam Radio, 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) 16:03, 26 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:GlitterBeam Radio

Hello, Eugenioceri. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "GlitterBeam Radio".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 16:29, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]