User talk:Nickboariu

Welcome!

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

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 05:28, 10 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (October 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia.

This submission appears to be taken from https://docs.decred.org/getting-started/constitution/, https://blockonomi.com/decred-guide/. Wikipedia cannot accept material copied from elsewhere, unless it explicitly and verifiably has been released to the world under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license or into the public domain and is written in an acceptable tone—this includes material that you own the copyright to. You should attribute the content of a draft to outside sources, using citations, but copying and pasting or closely paraphrasing sources is not acceptable. The entire draft should be written using your own words and structure. Note to reviewers: do not leave copyright violations sitting in the page history. Please follow the instructions here.

You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

User:Nickboariu/sandbox may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
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.

David.moreno72 08:44, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Nickboariu, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that 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! David.moreno72 08:44, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Nickboariu. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article User:Nickboariu/sandbox, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 07:39, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Theroadislong, how can I clarify this request of a COI? I believe that I have abided by the policies within the neutral point of view. Is there something specific in my article that is contrary? --Nick Boariu 07:47, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above notice details what you need to do. This would appear to apply to you:

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID)."

SmartSE (talk) 20:40, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Smartse: Where do I go to disclose my employer? Is it on my personal wiki page? I read the guidelines and it says where to disclose if the editor is paid by connection to the subject. I'm not paid by connection to the subject. --Nick (talk) 21:14, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think I found it. It's the connected contributor template. I'll make the applicable changes. Thanks! --Nick (talk) 21:17, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Nick. I work on COI and advocacy stuff in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing. Thanks for your willingness to contribute to Wikipedia and for engaging with the COI guideline. There is a bit more to go...

There are two pieces to managing conflict of interest in Wikipedia - disclosure and peer review - with the peer review conducted with a clear view of the conflict of interest.

The clearest disclosure of your relationship with Decred project that I have found is here, where you wrote The page is about a cryptocurrency project that I volunteer with. I fixed the tag on the Decred talk page to refer to that link. You haven't disclosed if you hold any "atoms"; and as this is a currency, you should do, in my view.

Would you please clarify that? (you can reply here, just below this) Once you do, we can talk about the "peer view" piece of COI management. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 04:12, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jytdog: Hi, thanks for the clarification. No, unfortunately I invested in Tezos. To give some background about me and why I decided to write this article, for the past three months I have been familiarizing myself with the cryptocurrency and blockchain space. In my field of work, B2B saas, it's a space that is getting a lot of attention. I decided to take it upon myself to learn about it. How it works. Why it works. The projects, the people, etc. Especially since I walked into Tezos without doing any real research. During this time I've had the pleasure of meeting people, both virtually and in person. I've met people that are working on projects like Litecoin, BAT, Ethereum, and even the team that's built a cryptocurrency exchange locally called Quadriga. This is how I learned about the Decred project. I thought it was a very interesting because of it's technology and history. I noticed that there wasn't an article about it on Wikipedia. This is when I got the idea that it would be a great opportunity for me to share what I've learned with others. I slowly pieced things together and wrote the article as best I could, using the guidelines provided. I've communicated directly with the developers to help clarify the detailed technical aspects of their technology. And this is why I referred to myself as a volunteer. Decred is not a company. It's a community of people building technology for the public benefit. In some ways, it's like Wikipedia. I hope that clears things up. I'm eager to get feedback from the peer review of the article, as I plan to write more. I was hoping to get feedback from wikipedia editors during the [contribution month] but it seems the organizers never got it finalized for my city. --Nick (talk) 06:40, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

So there is "advocacy" and there is "COI". Advocacy = "I am vegan and come to WP to write about how great veganism is". COI = "I work for Hampton Creek and come to WP to write about how great veganism is".

There are lots of online communities around various projects, and with these folks the line between advocacy and COI is very blurry. In the case of cryptocurrencies the blur is pushing well over into COI, since many of those folks own coin and the more people who come into the "project", the more value their coin gains.

In any case, edits by people who are "just" advocates, and people who have a COI, are indistinguablle. Both write content that violates several of our content policies, because they came here to write about how great X is.

There is often no sourcing or at all, or sourcing only from X, and little to no high quality, independent sources.

The content often says nothing bad, at all.

The content is often just like one would find at the central website for the project and often contains way, way too much detail.

In other words, the goal isn't to write a Wikipedia encyclopedia article, but to use a page in Wikipedia to promote X.

Lots of people make this mistake. If you look at history of other articles about cryptocurrencies in WP you will see that me and some other editors have been consistently paring back content added by cryptocurrency advocates that is unsourced, sourced to reddit or other invalid refs, etc.

This is a difficult subject in WP lately. Jytdog (talk) 07:01, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jytdog: I took a look at your other edits on those pages and see what you mean; the line can be blurry. All the points you mention make a lot of sense. However, I still believe the language I used is neutral, and the content is based on statements and facts from the sources I was able to find, which do include sources with editorial oversight such as Chicago Tribune, Forbes, and Nasdaq. After re-reading, I still do not see where the language comes across as advertorial or opinionated. If you can provide me with some examples that do seem this way, I will be happy to re-write. --Nick (talk) 20:40, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I see another editor came and made some changes. I can use those as a guide to refine the article. Thanks! --Nick (talk) 21:24, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A page you started (Decred) has been reviewed!

Thanks for creating Decred, Nickboariu!

Wikipedia editor Nerd1a4i just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

Nice article!

To reply, leave a comment on Nerd1a4i's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Nerd1a4i (talk) 01:24, 22 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks @Nerd1a4i: --Nick

Nomination of Decred for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Decred is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decred (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Prince of Thieves (talk) 15:25, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

In recent weeks, a number of new publications written on the subject have come out. We can take a look at them to see if they qualify as reputable sources. On the surface, these are articles written by independent journalists at third-party magazines, such as Bitcoin Magazine, Coincentral, and Business Insider. Nick (talk) 01:05, 17 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Decred for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Decred is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Decred (3rd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Џ 23:55, 10 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]