User talk:Susana Sousa Ribeiro

Welcome!

Hello, A Cachopa, 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? 13:37, 16 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. None of these situations apply. I only used a nickname because my name was not available.

I just wanted the page I edited in Portuguese to be available in English. It's not possible? A Cachopa (talk) 12:18, 17 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JimfbleakHello. None of these situations apply. I only used a nickname because my name was not available.

I just wanted the page I edited in Portuguese to be available in English. It's not possible? Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 18:13, 18 July 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.
You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.
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.

Your draft has no independent verifiable sources, hardly any wikilinks, and a highly promotional tone , eg the following he displayed a passion for the arts, embarking on his musical journey... which garnered recognition... as one of the most notable works within the video community... After achieving success as a machinima directo A text dump with no wikilinks or references looks like a copyright violation, perhaps in translation (I note Filmografia, but I didn't check.

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 are writing about yourself, or someone you know as a friend, colleague, client, employer or relative, you have a conflict of interest, and you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've deleted it now, it's a direct translation of the Portuguese article with no acknowledgement or attemp to conform to our standards Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:07, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I see that you acknowledged in an edit summary, undeleted for now Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak I don't understand. I'm not writing about myself or anyone I know, the original page in Portuguese wasn't even created by me. There are links to independent websites and news that support the information. Is this type of sources not accepted? Are only academic sources accepted? Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 10:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

First, the page still exists as a draft at Draft:Hugo de Almeida, it has not yet been permanently deleted. Are we talking about the same page? You say that it has links to independent websites and news that support the information. Is this type of sources not accepted? Are only academic sources accepted? , but your draft has no references of any kind. The Portuguese original also has no in-line references, just some links at the bottom. Even if that's acceptable on pt-wiki, it's not here, and of course references there are no help to you here. Your draft will never be accepted unless you have in-line references to independent third-party sources to support what you say. They don't have to be in English, but they need to be there. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:58, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Jimfbleak sorry, I had updated the information sources, but I think I did it in the wrong draft. It is now updated. But I can't publish, right? Does it have to stay in draft? Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 18:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@JimfbleakI have already placed all the fonts as requested. But I can't publish it, because I'm not an experienced user. In this case, how to proceed? Does anyone publish? Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 21:20, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Copy the following to the top of the draft and save {{subst:submit}}. That will create a review box which will attract a reviewer in due course Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hugo de Almeida (November 8)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:Hugo de Almeida 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.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Susana Sousa Ribeiro! 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! Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Vanderwaalforces I don't understand why it was refused. There are news, mentions on websites... all content comes from reliable sources... Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 02:15, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hugo de Almeida (February 2)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of films). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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:

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO, WP:DIRECTOR) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As other reviewers have noted, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. Please note that many of the references are not from sources that are considered reliable and should be removed (including blogs, company websites, Twitter, YouTube). Additionally, the draft tends to read too much like a CV, which Wikipedia is not. Also, if you have any connection to the subject, including being paid, you have a conflict of interest that you must declare on your Talk page (to see instructions on how to do this please click the link). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:DIRECTOR criteria #1, because XXXXX").

You may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page and I would be happy to reassess.

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:Hugo de Almeida 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.

Cabrils (talk) 02:23, 2 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hugo de Almeida has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hugo de Almeida. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 19:23, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 10:36, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Susana Sousa Ribeiro, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Susana Sousa Ribeiro|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 19:27, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said before, I am not being paid to edit the article, nor is there any interest involved. Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 16:52, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 10:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 10:43, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will the article be reviewed now or do I have to do another procedure? Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 13:17, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 15:07, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted it for review, it can take sometime for a reviewer to come along it is not a queue, reviewers pick and choose what they review, if I was to review it I would probably decline it, but I am leaving it for another reviewer. Theroadislong (talk) 15:34, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I realized that it is practically impossible to have an article approved, if even following all the guidelines and including sources it is rejected anyway. Apparently, the problem is that a new user is trying to create new articles. Thank you for your help. Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 16:28, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, it's not. I just had a look at it. The sources are really messy and were duplicated, the PDF is unsearchable and page numbers are not provided to provide context, the prose is really piecemeal (lleva de fragmentos pequeños que no están conectados), filmography isn't cited, but IMO (in my opinion) the subject could be considered notable due to the amount of coverage his work as received (WP:NARTIST#3), especially in light of the SpendIn source. It needs a really good cleanup, IMO.

Anyway, I will be removing the paid editing tag and requesting WP:OVERSIGHT on the IP address above. Aaron Liu (talk) 22:26, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu The filmography isn't cited? Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 23:27, 9 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You need citations in that section next to the film names as well, at least. Aaron Liu (talk) 01:24, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing has been rejected it is awaiting review. Theroadislong (talk) 16:37, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Hugo de Almeida has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Hugo de Almeida. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:32, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Hugo de Almeida (September 10)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

I think the sources do give enough notability. Prose can very much be fixed—by you, me, or someone else.

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:Hugo de Almeida 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.

Aaron Liu (talk) 12:03, 10 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aaron Liu Thank you so much for your kindness and patience. I've been editing this article for a long time, and I honestly don’t know what else I can do with it. So, I’m not going to make any more edits. I hope someone else can fixe it. Thank you very much! Susana Sousa Ribeiro (talk) 20:49, 14 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]