User talk:ULange

This is ULange's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Welcome!

Hi ULange! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:26, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sabine Sommerkamp-Homann (September 12)

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

The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.

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:

Far too much unreferenced content for an article on a living person (WP:BLP). Please ensure that every material statement, anything potentially contentious, and all private personal and family details are clearly supported by inline citations to reliable published sources, or else removed.

There are also promotional/peacocky expressions which must be removed unless they are direct quotes from independent sources (and even then should ideally be removed in the interests of neutrality). For example, claiming that she is "an expert on German and international haiku poetry", and citing her own Doctoral thesis as evidence is wholly inappropriate.

(PS: I also have doubts about notability, but I will reserve judgement on that until the above-mentioned issues have been addressed.)

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:Sabine Sommerkamp-Homann 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ULange! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:25, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Hello ULange. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Sabine Sommerkamp-Homann, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, 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:ULange. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=ULange|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:36, 12 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi DoubleGrazing, Thanks for your feedback. I have just disclosed the compensation for the article by my client on my user page User:ULange. I understand that paid editors are discouraged from further editing declined articles unless they go through the Wikipedia:Articles for creation process. Is that correct? Could I start incorporating your feedback into the article and resubmit it for review? Thanks for your help! ULange (talk) 11:53, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for disclosing, this is appreciated.

There are two main editing restrictions on paid editors (and anyone else with a conflict of interest related to a subject they edit on):

They may not publish an article directly, but must go through the AfC review process (as indeed you are doing). This means they should not create an article in the main article space, or move one there from the draft space.
Once an article has been published, they may not edit it directly, with the exception of entirely non-contentious edits such as grammar/typo or straightforward factual corrections (supported by reliable sources). They should instead make edit requests via the article's talk page, as outlined in WP:MAKINGEREQ.

To be clear, paid/COI editors are allowed to edit drafts freely; the edit request requirement only applies to published articles.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:48, 14 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I appreciate your help. ULange (talk) 15:18, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]