User talk:JRB147MK

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi JRB147MK! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

-- 15:01, Monday, August 21, 2023 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

Welcome!

Hi JRB147MK! 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

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:11, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC but published straight away

Hi, I've noticed that you're creating articles on scientists in Wales. Can I ask, why do you submit them for AfC review, if you're then going to immediately move them to the main article space anyway? Not that that's a huge problem, necessarily (other than leaving it for someone else to remove the AfC tags), just wanted to check if there's some misunderstanding somewhere that I might be able to clear up? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:14, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Additional to this, when you move them to mainspace, please read the newly published article and tidy it up. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 17:17, 6 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have sent you a note about a page you started

Hello, JRB147MK. Thank you for your work on Kirsti Bohata. User:DreamRimmer, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:

Great job! LinkedIn is considered a self-published source, so I recommend replacing it with a secondary, more reliable source.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|DreamRimmer}}. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

𝙳𝚛𝚎𝚊𝚖𝚁𝚒𝚖𝚖𝚎𝚛 ^{𝚍𝚒𝚜𝚌𝚞𝚜𝚜} 03:03, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Hello JRB147MK. 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:JRB147MK. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=JRB147MK|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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:00, 13 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. I am creating Wikipedia pages as part of my work experience for an organisation, they have assigned me a task to create Wikipedia pages for some of the people associated with the organisation. I am not creating pages for any financial stake or gain. JRB147MK (talk) 10:18, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for replying. Please see this section of the paid contributions policy, which states that "Interns are considered employees for this purpose. If they are directed or expected to edit Wikipedia as part of an internship, they must disclose." (Whether your position is officially designated as an internship or not, it very much sounds to me like that's what it is in reality.) Please make the necessary disclosure now.

IMPORTANT: Going back to my earlier message on this page (see section 'AfC but published straight away', above), because of your conflict of interest, you are not allowed to publish these articles directly, but must go through the AfC review process. Which means, you should keep submitting your drafts for review like you have done thus far, but do not then immediately move them from the draft space into the main article space; wait instead for the AfC review to be carried out. (Note that this is true whether you come under the paid-editing policy, or only the general conflict-of-interest one.)

Please confirm that you have read and understood the above points.

Finally, you should read this essay: WP:BOSS, and also show it to whoever has tasked you with these article creations. They have given you a very difficult job, and clearly not enough advice on how to comply with Wikipedia's policies. At the very least they need to be made aware of this, so that they don't repeat the problem with your successors or other staff members of theirs. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:34, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I feel it was rather unethical for them to give you such a task, but can only assume they are just very unfamiliar with how Wikipedia works. I have seen the drafts you've created (I am a draft reviewer) and unfortunately the academics just do not have the notability needed for a Wikipedia article. I agree to show the people managing your work experience WP:BOSS and I hope the rest of it goes well. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 16:07, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all comfortable with the notion of being asked to write articles about academics, but I think the above comment is just plain wrong; all but one of the ones I've looked at appear to be clear passes of WP:PROF. Espresso Addict (talk) 23:35, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hywel R. Thomas (September 20)

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

All sources used are primary sources by either him or his employers.

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:Hywel R. Thomas 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.

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 12:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, JRB147MK! 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! -- NotCharizard ^🗨 12:23, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Helen Fulton (September 20)

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

All sources appear to be primary 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:Helen Fulton 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.

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 14:44, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Michael Charlton (academic) (September 20)

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

As with other submissions, sources are primary.

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:Michael Charlton (academic) 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.

-- NotCharizard ^🗨 16:02, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:JRB147MK, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=JRB147MK|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 16:08, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Articles moved to mainspace

Hi :) Based on advice from another editor, I have published your articles Michael Charlton (academic), Helen Fulton, and Hywel R. Thomas which I had previously declined. -- NotCharizard ^🗨 04:40, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 11 December 2023. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2023 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 28 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]