User talk:Markillman

Welcome!

Hello, Markillman, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! GermanJoe (talk) 14:30, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Help request

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.

Hi Joe,

Thanks for your message. I was aware of and have read the conflict of interest advice pages. That said, being new to Wikipedia editing, I had not set up my Sandbox in the UserSpace draft format you referred to in the message. I have now done this, and included my COI declaration on the page. With both those elements done, I would welcome your review prior to admission.

My justification for setting up the Bubble Group page is that we have been asked several times why we are not listed on the Comparison of Project Management software list (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_project_management_software) and while I see that there is potential for COI in creating a page related to the company for who'm I'm employed, there is also a 'chicken and egg situation' of needing to have one, in order to be listed on the other.

Thanks in advance for any feedback you can provide Mark

Markillman (talk) 15:32, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Markillman, thank you for following Wikipedia's "conflict of interest" guideline. I have taken a quick look at your draft, and it seems to be based on only 2 sources, a short review in KMWorld, which is almost entirely based on interview quotes by Peter Hoyland, and a user review site. Both sources are OK-ish, but don't provide enough detailed independent coverage about the company for an entire article. While there is no fix minimum number of required sources, you should aim for atleast 2-3 more independent reliable sources (see WP:RS) with detailed coverage about the company. I realize, that can be difficult for smaller companies, or companies that only operate in a smaller market segment. But without such sources an article will most likely get rejected by a reviewer. Two more quick tips: 1) I'd recommend to read Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations if you haven't done so already - it contains a bit of additional practical advice for organizations. 2) If you want to contact a specific editor, you can use {{ping|username here}} in your message and sign it immediately in the same edit. The user in question will get an automatic notification. Hope that information helps a bit. When you found more sources and believe your draft to be ready, you can click on the blue "Submit your draft for review" button in the draft page and it will be put in a (backlogged) queue for reviewing. GermanJoe (talk) 23:16, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

talk

Hi GermanJoe, Thanks for the advice. I'll follow them all up and go forward from there as soon as we have the required elements. Thanks again. Markillman (talk) 08:01, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Markillman, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Markillman! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like ChamithN (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bubble (April 21)

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

Articles should focus on what independent sources have written about the subject, not what it says about itself.

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:Bubble and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 04:21, 21 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Bubble concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Bubble, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 21:19, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. SwisterTwister talk 16:05, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User talk:SwisterTwister HasteurBot Following previous feedback, I've been considering how I can improve this listing. Despite my declared interest (working for the company the article references), I respect the rules of Wikipedia and followed the mantra that it was better to add appropriate content at the right time - as opposed to try to push through a listing that had been flagged for improvement. Since my initial draft there are some new independent sources I can reference, so I will pick this article back up very soon. Thanks for the flag and suggestions Markillman (talk) 19:34, 20 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SwisterTwister. Following a request for undeletion, i've been advised that page Draft:Bubble was removed under speedy deletion criterion G11. The feedback from the above request was, to contact the removing administrator and to directly request that that draft be re-instated. Once this has taken place, I will re-explore the tone and content of the article before re-submission. Wikipedia has a comprehensive Comparison of project management software list. So, while I fully respect the rules of the platform, the list must be allowed to evolve over time (as opposed to remaining static on the basis of historical citations). Thanks in advance for your response. Markillman