User talk:Leo Palmaro

Revalize moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Revalize. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it is promotional and reads like an advertisement. 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. GPL93 (talk) 17:11, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GPL93,

Thank you for your feedback on the Revalize article. We appreciate your guidance and have worked on improving the wording and content to better match Wikipedia's neutrality guidelines. We have also enhanced the structure to better separate the history of the company, including its formation background and acquisitions.

We have re-submitted our page for approval and hope to hear back from you soon.

Best regards,

Leo Leo Palmaro (talk) 20:35, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Who is "we"? C F A 💬 18:47, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CFA,

Thank you for your feedback.

To clarify, "we" refers to Revalize, in collaboration with a third-party agency, S&G (stuntandgimmicks.com). The content was initially written by me, Leo Palmaro, Product Marketing Manager at Revalize. S&G assisted in refining the content to align better with Wikipedia's neutrality guidelines.

Based on your recent feedback, I will be working with S&G to further refine the article, particularly the selection of sources, to meet Wikipedia’s standards for notability and verifiability.

Thank you for your guidance.

Best regards,

Leo Leo Palmaro (talk) 15:33, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Accounts can only be operated by one person. What you are doing is undisclosed paid editing, a violation of Wikimedia's Terms of Use. Please follow the instructions I leave you very carefully, or you will be blocked without further notice. C F A 💬 17:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Leo Palmaro. 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:Revalize, 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);
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. GPL93 (talk) 17:12, 5 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Revalize (August 4)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Notability looks borderline: Most articles seem to be run-of-the-mill, routine coverage which do not count towards notability per WP:ORGTRIV.

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:Revalize 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.

C F A 💬 18:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leo Palmaro! 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! C F A 💬 18:46, 4 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello Leo Palmaro. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Revalize, 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Leo Palmaro. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Leo Palmaro|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. C F A 💬 17:04, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA, thank you for your guidance. I understand my mistake and will add the proper disclosure immediately. To confirm, as I am employed directly by Revalize, should my disclose by formatted as follows?

I will add this to my user page and refrain from further edits until I receive further instructions. Please let me know if any changes are needed to this disclosure. Thank you for your patience and assistance in this matter. Leo Palmaro (talk) 20:31, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that's fine. Please make sure your account is always used by the creator or you may be blocked. Accounts should not be shared. C F A 💬 20:36, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, CFA, for your assistance with the disclosure and profile updates. I confirm this account was and will only be used by me. I'll review the source guidelines you provided and work on improving the article's references. If I have any questions after studying the guidelines, I'll reach out. Your guidance is appreciated. Leo Palmaro (talk) 16:36, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello CFA,

Thank you for your previous guidance regarding my draft article on Revalize. I've carefully reviewed the Wikipedia guidelines on reliable sources, and I realize that many of the sources I originally used may not meet the criteria for notability and neutrality.

I'm committed to improving the article to meet Wikipedia's standards, and I have some specific questions:

1. Are any of the sources I've currently listed acceptable to use? If so, which ones?

2. If I remove the sources that don't meet Wikipedia's standards, approximately how many high-quality sources would I need to get the article approved?

3. What types of sources would be most appropriate for establishing notability for a company like Revalize?

4. Are there any specific strategies you'd recommend for finding neutral, third-party coverage of the company?

I'm finding it challenging to locate independent, reliable sources that aren't promotional in nature. Given this difficulty, should I consider narrowing the scope of the article, or reassess whether the topic meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines at all?

I appreciate any insights you can provide to help me improve this draft or reassess its suitability for Wikipedia. Thank you for your time and expertise.

Best regards,

Leo Palmaro Leo Palmaro (talk) 20:09, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]