User talk:Ruijis

I have some research experience with gbXML, so I've made several contributions to BIM and gbXML recently, but MrOllie has reverted my edit again and again. I have checked my reference format, interest conflict, etc. If you could help with this, I would appreciate that. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ruijis (talk • contribs)

You say you have checked your 'interest conflict', but you keep inserting citations to yourself. - MrOllie (talk) 12:44, 15 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't cite myself, could you tell me which one you are talking about?

You appear to be spamming gbXMLorg - you need independent sources to establish notability and suitability for inclusion. Acroterion (talk) 04:16, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

gbxml.org is a nonprofit organization. It is the only office website for gbXML schema update. It's an independent resource. Ruijis (talk) 21:38, 26 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks for clarifying that. I will add some papers from the research field. By the way, what do you actually mean for independence? I found that lots of sources under BIM, gbXML, or other Wikipedia pages are commercial companies' websites, though gbXML is not like that. But I agree with you that I cite too much from gbXML org. Thanks much.

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Ruijis. 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 conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} 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 WP:Spam);
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. Acroterion (talk) 04:14, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Causal thinking moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to Causal thinking. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it has no sources. 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. Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 23:44, 7 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Causal thinking (June 20)

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

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:Causal thinking 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.

Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ruijis! 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! Flemmish Nietzsche (talk) 22:09, 20 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Causal thinking

Hello, Ruijis. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Causal thinking, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:07, 20 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]