User talk:Introspective.Scholar4

Draft:JOBSwithDOD

Hi Scholar.me.Squad, for some reason the mechanism we use to review drafts did not leave a message here but see the draft for my decline and comments. Read through the links provided in the gray box and you may find Your first article helpful. S0091 (talk) 20:42, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your username, "Scholar.me.Squad", may not meet Wikipedia's username policy because it suggests this is a group or shared account. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing the form at Special:GlobalRenameRequest, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 23:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Scholar.me.Squad. 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:JOBSwithDOD, 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 article subjects 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)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
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) 05:53, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear DoubleGrazing, I am not being paid or compensated in anyway by JOBSwithDOD, I do not work for JOBSwithDOD. I work for a non-profit think thank that does U.S. policy work and I am a fundraiser at that organization. Scholar.me.Squad (talk) 09:24, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is your editing in any way related to your job or job duties? How did you come to edit about JOBSwithDOD?

Your username suggests that this is a group account("squad"). Are you the only one with access to this account? 331dot (talk) 09:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for guiding me on this, I have updated my username. I should have read the Wikipedia policies and selected a username more carefully. Scholar.me.Squad (talk) 09:35, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I work at a U.S. policy nonprofit think tank in Washington DC. My professional work in no way is related to my work. I come from a family wherein my father and five of my uncles have served in the military and worked across the defense industry, though I have not worked in either. It is an interest of mine, a hobby to study and follow thematic topics of interest related to the defense industry, their hiring and recruiting practices and the like. I have been paying careful attention to the Defense Business Board (https://dbb.defense.gov/Board-Members/Board-Members-Bio-view/Article/3158979/jennifer-mcclure/) and it's study recently completed that they will be revamping their civilian hiring and recruiting practices (https://dbb.defense.gov/Portals/35/Documents/Meetings/2023/March%2017%202023/Talent%20Pipeline%20Slide%20Deck%20as%20of%20MAR%2017.pdf) it's quite interesting; at least, for me. I have spent time since the DBB released such findings in their report studying the current landscape of DoD Civilian Hiring and what options exist at present for the DoD. In doing such research, I learned about the business JOBSwithDOD.com and believe that there is little reference to JOBSwithDOD.com but it should be documented. Scholar.me.Squad (talk) 09:41, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you for advising on this. Indeed, I am not engaged in any of these practices and will be careful to avoid such practices. Kindly. Scholar.me.Squad (talk) 09:43, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your answer. I'm not sure if you read my answer to your question at the AFC Desk yet; please do. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, I just read the answer on the AFC and you raise a number of good points. I have gone back through the article in an effort to scrub the article of any citations that would be self referencing and simply have proper citations related to statements made within the Wikipedia page that do not come from the jobswithdod.com website. Scholar.me.Squad (talk) 10:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JOBSwithDOD (July 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SafariScribe 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 draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:JOBSwithDOD 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.

Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Introspective.Scholar4! 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! Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 11:32, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Safari Scribe,

I hope you are doing well and having a great week. Thank you for helping to refine my article for me. Is it a matter of me needing more citations that meet all four of the criteria. I will do additional research in the months ahead and seek to meet these requirements.

Kindly Introspective.Scholar4 (talk) 12:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JOBSwithDOD (September 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 Theroadislong was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:JOBSwithDOD 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) 15:34, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:JOBSwithDOD has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:JOBSwithDOD. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 16:29, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the continued feedback. I will keep researching and see if further citations that better meet the Wikipedia standards may be found in the months ahead. 2601:5CF:8001:4760:6068:41DA:B584:EA07 (talk) 16:39, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JOBSwithDOD (September 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 Liance was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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:JOBSwithDOD 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.

~Liance^talk 16:38, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Introspective.Scholar4!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Grumpylawnchair (talk) 03:07, 21 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JOBSwithDOD (September 28)

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

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.

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 websites). 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:JOBSwithDOD 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.

Ktkvtsh (talk) 23:11, 28 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: JOBSwithDOD (November 19)

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 Ca was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:39, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Ca, thank you for reviewing the Wikipedia draft that I am working on. I appreciate your interest in the work I am doing and the page related to jobswithdod. You have expressed that the topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia; however, I happen to work in the national defense industry and have first hand knowledge that while the industry is quite niche and esoteric, this business and in particular the writings they are producing as well as their formal relationship with USAJOBS (USAJobs) is both established and highly regarding within the defense and national security industry. I have done extensive research in conversation both with the U.S. Department of Defense, the executive leadership at jobswithdod, and with defense industry executives at numerous fortune 500 companies, and all attest that jobswithdod is a leading resource for hiring within the defense ecosystem.

Firstly, jobswithdod has a formal relationship (a government contract) with the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) and are the only job board allowed to publish DoD civilian jobs that are otherwise only available on USAJOBS. This is a very prominent resource to the defense industry and it's well regarded. It may not be common knowledge to people from other outside industries, but within defense, this is something that is noteworthy. Second, if you look at the website search page for jobswithdod (jobswithdod.com/search-jobs) you will see no less than ten of the largest and most notable defense companies who have a business relationship with jobswithdod posting their jobs on this website. Companies include:

BAE Systems

Boeing

GE Aerospace

General Dynamics

Kenjya-Trusant Group

Lockheed Martin

Northrop Grumman

RTX

SAIC

SpaceX

The social media account on Twitter/X (https://x.com/JOBSwithDOD) alone, has over 63,000 followers all of whom are leading defense experts from across the industry. One of their more prominent Twitter/X posts, a report published October 28th, 2024 titled 2025 Defense Industry Outlook: Key Projected Trends and Career Insights has over 28,000 views within a matter of a few days.

Part of my research studying the impact of jobswithdod on the recruiting and hiring marketplace for the defense industry has been through the lens of discussions and meetings with the DoD Business Board (https://dbb.defense.gov/). They have explained to me that their work in concert with the jobswithdod company, allowing jobswithdod exclusive access to publish DoD civilian jobs from USAJOBS to the jobswithdod website is precisely because jobswithdod is so notable with leading defense companies that it allows a the DoD civilian employers to obtain better brand exposure for their job listings and organization by providing the DoD a shared job posting platform with these private industry companies. I want to also draw your attention to the following document, that while long and highly detailed, underscores the relevancy of why jobswithdod is noteworthy for having each and every DoD civilian employers and their DoD civilian jobs listed on the website: https://dbb.defense.gov/Portals/35/Documents/Meetings/2023/March%2017%202023/Talent%20Pipeline%20Slide%20Deck%20as%20of%20MAR%2017.pdf To understand the impact and notability of jobswithdod is to understand the objectives and goals of the Talen Pipeline FY2023 Assessment Report.

I have worked to explain this within the jobswithdod Wikipedia page, perhaps I have not done so clearly or to the scholarly standards of the Wikipedia community. I grant that and ask for help to improve my work. Please allow me the opportunity to further my research and make refinements to the page in light of this explanation that I am putting forth to you.

Kind Regards Introspective.Scholar4 (talk) 16:16, 19 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]