User talk:Chicagoese

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

PivotPointEditor (talk · contribs) has been paid by unknown on behalf of Pivot Point International.

Chicagoese, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Chicagoese! 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 Worm That Turned (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

21:00, 28 January 2016 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Leo Passage has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Leo Passage. Thanks! LaMona (talk) 00:15, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

Hello, PivotPointEditor. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or 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 for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leo Passage (January 30)

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

Much of the content here is still unreferenced. Any information that cannot be verified in third-party sources must be removed.

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:Leo Passage 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.

LaMona (talk) 00:19, 30 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

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.

Please help me with...

Hello. Long story; short version is I'm a freelance editor working for Pivot Point International, a cosmetology education company. A little over a year ago Pivot Point initiated writing a Wikipedia article about their deceased founder, Leo Passage. [1] Passage (d. 2011) is/was very well-known and respected in the cosmetology education industry, ranking with the likes of peers such as Vidal Sassoon. They submitted the article first in October 2014, then December 2014, both rejected with instructions to improve. ("Please fix section headings, wikilinks, and footnotes, then Resubmit and we'll be close to publishing.") Then it was forgotten for a while. Then I came in as a freelancer this January and they passed the project to me. I addressed the references, the "peacock" issues, the source paraphrasing, and the formatting and resubmitted. This time it got bounced back with much more imperative feedback about Conflict of Interest, the dubiousness of my username and, "Much of the content here is still unreferenced."

Okay, not so short a story. Anyway, what is the best course of action here? The purpose of publishing the article is in the "well-intentioned COI" category. The username, PivotPointEditor sounds rather commercial, however. Should I open a new username, put the COI statement at the top of the page and resubmit? Really not sure how to move forward. Any advice would be most welcome. Thanks in advance.

PivotPointEditor (talk) 21:24, 2 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have to agree with the comment about much unsourced content. In particular, the entire "early life" section does not cite any sources. (The "Illness and death" section conversely seems too heavily referenced; do we really need seven sources for the same content? Why wouldn't one or two of the best suffice?) Some of the peacock isues to me also seemed to remain.

Regarding the username, it may indeed be better to request a username change to have the username represent yourself, not your client (though you should also familiarize yourself with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, particlularly regarding "Paid contributions without disclosure").

My main advice would be to make sure that the draft's entire content is based on what third-party sources report on Passage, and to remove details that may sound nice but provide no information on Passage. Huon (talk) 00:05, 3 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great, that I can work with. Thanks for your time. PivotPointEditor (talk) 22:08, 4 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leo Passage (November 9)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This still needs all additional in-depth third-party news sources overall, and please no trivial passing mentions.

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:Leo Passage 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.

SwisterTwister talk 04:11, 9 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Leo Passage has been accepted

Leo Passage, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Primefac (talk) 18:21, 21 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

A cup of coffee for you!

Your work at Leo Passage is interesting. Thanks for saying hello at WP:Fashion. Blue Rasberry (talk) 00:49, 1 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Raccuglia (December 28)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

The comment the reviewer left was:

There's still not yet enough significant independent news and the current ones aren't enough to convince an acceptable article; also, it's important to note that people cannot be inherited notability.

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:David Raccuglia and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:David Raccuglia, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and save.
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.

SwisterTwister talk 04:14, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:David Raccuglia has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:David Raccuglia. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 04:17, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:David Raccuglia concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:David Raccuglia, 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) 01:34, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:David Raccuglia

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:David Raccuglia, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DGG ( talk ) 04:54, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]