User talk:Raoul Blindenbacher

Welcome!

Hello, Raoul Blindenbacher, 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, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Best practices for editors with close associations
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! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:49, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jim, I do not understand why you deleted not only my new page but also the page about the Governmental Learning Spiral, which I wrote and was approved many year ago. Best, Raoul Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 16:22, 27 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

....do I get an answer to my question? Best, Raoul Blindenbacher Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 09:49, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

You have an obvious conflict of interest, please don't write about yourself, your friends or relatives and read the guidance below:

When you write about a person, you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that they meet the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the person or an associated organisation, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the person claims or interviewing them. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls.

Although you had some refs, two didn't work or weren't formatted, two were linked to your own organisations, one was an unnecessary list of your publications, and one was a download site for your pdf. We require independent third-party sources, especially if you are writing about yourself.
I don't know if you meet our notability criteria, but the number of publications definitely isn't a criterion.

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

Half the article appears to be a self-review of your own book.

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Next the book. First be aware that I could have blocked as an undisclosed paid editor, since you have written about a book of which you were the author. 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:Raoul Blindenbacher. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Raoul Blindenbacher|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}.

Again, much of the text is unreferenced or referenced to your own publications or other affiliated sources, several references are dead.
A © tag is a clear indication of COI, it's not our job to protect your copyright
Most of the text is an unreferenced or self-referenced text dump, with you describing your own concept, and with no indication of why it is notable. It's pretty clear that you have no interest in Wikipedia other than as a vehicle for promoting yourself and your book.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Also read Your first article. If you have a conflict of interest, you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:22, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for your reply. I fully understand what you are saying about the page I created about myself yesterday. Also there are many pages of scholars who quote themselfe. Never mind, what I do not understand is why you deleted a page after almost then years without warning or requests of corrections. Is it possible to make the page available to me, so I can make the corrections you request and then ask you to proffered it before publishing it? That would help me a lot. Thanks and with best regards, Raoul Blindenbacher Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 10:46, 28 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

..please give me access to my deleted texts! Thanks and with best regards, Raoul Blindenbacher Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 14:33, 29 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want me to see a message, you can post on my talk page. You can alternatively leave a message on this page, and I will know you have done so if you start it with my username, User:Jimfbleak and sign it with four tildes ~~~~ when you post it. That will send me an alert. Otherwise I will not know.

I cannot see where you have disclosed your conflict of interest. You can edit the source of your user page, User:Raoul Blindenbacher and type {{UserboxCOI|1=Wikipedia article name}}, then click "save".

Your user page content will not be restore, you can't host biographies there. Your autobiographical article might be better as a redirect to Governmental Learning Spiral, since it's not clear whether you meet academic notability otherwise. If the GLS article is restored, it might be appropriate to restore to an earlier version with less COI editing. Either way, you need to formally declare your COI first Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:42, 30 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Raoul Blindenbacher/sandbox

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. A tag has been placed on User:Raoul Blindenbacher/sandbox requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Kleuske (talk) 14:47, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

July 2023

Welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions, but in one of your recent edits to User:Raoul Blindenbacher/sandbox, it appears that you have added original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Original research refers to material—such as facts, allegations, ideas, and personal experiences—for which no reliable, published sources exist; it also encompasses combining published sources in a way to imply something that none of them explicitly say. Please be prepared to cite a reliable source for all of your contributions. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. WP:PROMO also applies. Kleuske (talk) 14:49, 13 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kleuske, I do not understand your point about "original research". All my citations are from reliable sources such as the World Bank, OECD, and peer reviewed journals. Tell me, which citation refers not to a reliable source. By the way, the article was on Wikipedia for ten years. Then suddenly it was deleted. I worked hard to improve it and I am surprised that it is still not fulfilling your criteria. I.e. I compared it with similar articles such as Communities of Practice, Strategic Foresight and I see absolutely no difference... And last: Ulrich Lantermann, aka Lantus, Community Manager Wikimedia CH looked at the article and wrote to me in German: "Die Quellenarbeit im en-Artikel war aber vorbildhaft!"; free translation: the citing in the English article was exemplary! I very much look forward to your answer and with best regards, Raoul Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 05:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a point, it's a core policy. Whatever your research, this is not the place to publish it. And since you have a financial stake in the matter (selling your "method" to various companies) it violates WP:PROMO, too. IDGAF what a "community manager" says. Übrigens spreche ich Deutsch. Kleuske (talk) 10:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sehr geehrter Herr Kleuske, es ist richtig, dass ich die Methode (auch) verkaufe, wie übrigens andere auch. Gleichzeitig habe ich sie über Jahre nach den Regeln der Wissenschaft entwickelt. Ich habe dies als Senior Fellow am Graduate Institut in Genf und während meiner Arbeit bei der Welt Bank getan und habe die Methode auch an diversen Universitäten gelehrt (bspw. an der Universität Freiburg i.B., Universität Zürich, etc.). Die Herleitung der GLSp basiert auf einer heuristischen Technik. Indem diese bei Wikipedia aufgeschaltet wird, verdiene ich keinen Cent; wie ich übrigens auch keinen Cent verdient habe, wenn ich die Methode in einem Peer Reviewed Health Policy Journal publiziert oder darüber gelehrt habe (https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0168851018304172#). Der Artikel soll helfen, dass Behörden und andere Organisationen Zugang zu einer Methode erhalten, wie politische Probleme gelöst werden können. Ich wäre ihnen deshalb dankbar, wenn Sie mir Tips geben könnten, wie ich den Artikel so überarbeiten kann, dass er ihre Kriterien erfüllt. Dafür wäre ich Ihnen sehr dankbar. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, Raoul Blindenbacher Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 12:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have a massive conflict of interest, try to publish your own papers on Wikipedia (WP:OR). The exact details of the research and publishing of that paper are irrelevant. Kleuske (talk) 13:34, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...d.h. sie schlagen mir vor, dass ich bspw. das Welt Bank Buch nehme, in welchem ich die GLSp zum ersten Mal ausführlich herleite und beschreibe, zusammenfasse und alles andere wie Anwendungsbeispiele, weiterführende Literatur, etc. weglasse? RB Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 14:31, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ich schlage vor Sie finden eine andere website um Ihre publikation zu veröffentlichen. Das gehört eben nicht auf Wikipedia. Auch schlag ich vor Sie hören damit auf meine zeit zu verschwenden. Kleuske (talk) 15:18, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...das war nicht meine Absicht. Bitte entschuldigen sie... Nichts desto trotz lohnt es sich (auch im Internet) immer anständig zu bleiben. Ich bin gespannt, was der Community Manager zu ihrer Bemerkung (IDGAF) zu sagen hat. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, RB Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 16:37, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, the community manager sees no offense in the comment made by Kleuske. Now, I am going to give you the opportunity to consider placing an unblock request; anything else is really not proper use of this talk page, a privilege that can be taken away. Drmies (talk) 16:41, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...touche, sorry for that. Ich hoffe trotzdem, dass sie auf meine Frage eingehen. Mit freundlichen Grüßen, RB Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 13:31, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wen meinen Sie? Ich bin noch immer Frau Kleuske. Kleuske (talk)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Governmental Learning Spiral (July 14)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

This appears to be an advertisement for your own research.

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:Governmental Learning Spiral 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.

asilvering (talk) 05:13, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear silvering, what do you mean with "advertisement for your own research"? It is correct, that the origins of the GLSp go back to my dissertation. And yes, it was me who developed the method over time as a Senior Fellow at the Graduate Institute in Geneva with many other students and professors. In 2007 the World Bank asked me to help to implementing the method as modus operandi at the bank and to write a book about it, which was published by the Bank subsequently. The method is open source. In the mean time it was further developed by students and people who applied it in practice. There are numerous publications about it. I myself published about the method and its application in a peer reviewed journal, as indicated in my draft. This is not about my research but about a method used world wide to solve all sorts of political problems. I am only on of them and the one who felt the need to publish about it in Wikipedia. I am sure, many others will follow to contribute to improve the text once it is published. And here one more surprising aspect: When I sent the draft to Ulrich Lantermann aka Lantus, Community Manager, Wikimedia CH, his comment was "Die Quellenarbeit im en-Artikel war aber vorbildhaft!". Freely translated he is saying: The references in the English Version of the article is exemplary! How is it possible that you end up to come to such different conclusions! Long story short end: please let me know in detail where I should add or change something, so that the text can be published. I look forward to hearing from you and best regards, Raoul Blindenbacher Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 09:44, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Raoul Blindenbacher! 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! asilvering (talk) 05:13, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

...yes, I would be very thankful for help. My article was posted for ten years and suddenly deleted. I worked hard to improve it but it appears that it is still not good enough. No clue why... Best, Raoul Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 05:27, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

Enough is enough. You have been told at least four times to declare your COI, and I've also pointed out that I could have blocked you previously. You have ignored all the guidance, failed to disclose your COI, and ignored the editing guidance. Now blocked Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sorry??? Raoul Blindenbacher (talk) 16:43, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]