User talk:Garvincarter

Welcome!

Hi Garvincarter! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! Unbroken Chain (talk) 05:42, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... I've followed the new article wizard and am still having difficulty getting photos to be accepted. They keep getting rejected. Also, I don't know how to get the sidebar information on the right shoulder. It is on some many pages and I can't figure out how to create it on this entry.

I'll be submitting this soon for approval and any additional comments would be helpful.

thanks in advance. Here's the link:

Draft:Peter M. Walzer Garvin Carter (talk) 22:41, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've converted your link to a standard internal Wikipedia link, the whole URL is not necessary. Only accounts that are four days old and have at least 10 edits may upload images; neither of which is the case for you(yet). Images are also not necessary to get a draft approved; some images cannot be in drafts at all depending on the license. You don't need to worry about images until and unless your draft is accepted. 331dot (talk) 22:46, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

User:331dot - Thank you for the quick reply.

Garvin Carter (talk) 22:50, 1 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peter M. Walzer (February 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 Wgullyn 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Peter M. Walzer 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:Peter M. Walzer, 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.

Wgullyn (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Garvincarter! 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! Wgullyn (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Garvincarter. 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:Peter M. Walzer, 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 or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} 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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:03, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review and recommendations @DoubleGrazing.

Here is a brief reply to your concerns.

COI - I have on my profile that I take on research projects for pay. In this instance my client is an SEO and Marketing firm. I have no contact with the subject of this entry. I have no information if the subject has requested the page or if they are reimbursing who hired me. That is none of my business. It is not intuitive how to put the UPE on my page. I looked at the instructions and am still lost. Before taking the assignment I made it very clear I would not attempt the entry unless there were sufficient independent sources and sufficient notoriety. I was satisfied even though there are no major media puff pieces to cite. Not that there is any comparison for reasons an entry is acceptable, but this subject is of greater stature than many attorney entries on wikipedia. I saw one entry of a comparable attorney in this subjects market. The entry had one citation and that was an obituary (hardly objective and fact checked). My point is that it seems that there is sufficient proof to this subject's viability - the rest is finding a path. Hopefully your assistance will bring this closer. Final thought on COI. I do not promise a wiki entry will be published. I get paid for the research and content only. If it is accepted that is wonderful. If not - I've still fulfilled my obligation.

Ref-Bombing - This probably is related to the number of media links to the section on Media Legal Expert. The subject has been called upon by a wide range of media companies and commented on a variety of celebrities and legal issues. If the enumeration the instances is too much then my next suggestion would be to list the range of celebrities and legal topics with links to a handful of networks. Please let me know if this is sufficient.

Content without citation - every statement made is supported by linked citations. These citations may have been left to the end of sentences and paragraphs instead of mid sentence, but there is nothing stated that is left without support. If there is it can be removed.

Further reading - This section was suggested to me from the first draft. It can be removed. I thought if it as a bibliography and only included it because it was found in my research. I'm not afraid of killing my darlings as they say in writers circles.

If I have missed anything, I'll gladly address it. Thank you again for your assistance in getting my first solo effort off the ground. It is much easier adding to an existing post that tacking one on your own.

Garvin Carter (talk) 19:21, 29 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Peter M. Walzer has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Peter M. Walzer. Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:08, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peter M. Walzer (March 27)

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

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.

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

While some statements have been refbombed, several paragraphs remain unreferenced.

This still reads like a promo/vanity piece, not an encyclopaedia entry.

--

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:Peter M. Walzer 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:Peter M. Walzer, 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:17, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Peter M. Walzer has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Peter M. Walzer. Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:17, 27 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I don't know if you saw my responses. I've tried adding the connected contributor template to the Draft:Peter M. Walzer page. I have no way of knowing if it is formatted correctly, but I tried.

I'm editing the entry, removing the list of publications and simplifying the media links. That should cut 40 or so citations.

Thanks for your assistance. Garvin Carter (talk) 22:42, 6 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Peter M. Walzer (June 29)

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 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:Peter M. Walzer 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:Peter M. Walzer, 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.

Missvain (talk) 18:41, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart Walzer (July 6)

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

No substantial coverage of him in the media. A couple of passing mentions in The Dirty Thirty ABA journal article and an obituary in one newspaper aren't going to do it.

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:Stuart Walzer 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:Stuart Walzer, 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.

Clarityfiend (talk) 04:19, 6 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Stuart Walzer

Hello, Garvincarter. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stuart Walzer, 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) 05:01, 6 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Stuart Walzer

Hello, Garvincarter. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Stuart Walzer".

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 deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 04:33, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Peter M. Walzer

Hello, Garvincarter. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Peter M. Walzer, 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) 20:02, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Peter M. Walzer

Hello, Garvincarter. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Peter M. Walzer".

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 deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 18:29, 9 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]