User talk:Uklaweditor

Welcome!

Hello, Uklaweditor, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Simmons & Simmons, which 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! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:12, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern.

I am sure you will agree that law firm pages on wikipedia are some of the saddest pages to exist, do not provide any information and are mostly out of date (compare to banks / other professional services firms such as the Big Four). I do not get paid to edit wikipedia pages but I wanted to make law firm wikipedia pages read better so it showcases their work and the incredible legal industry of the UK that the whole world is envious of. I was going to edit pages for other British law firms as well but if the editors believe that the current pages look better than the one I had edited to - I am happy to let it be and not edit any further.

If editors think I have made the edits in a non-neutral way, happy for it to be edited to be neutral. But please do something about these law firm pages.

I will not be making any further edits and will leave it to the veterans like yourself. Uklaweditor (talk) 11:09, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

May 2022

Hello Uklaweditor. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Simmons & Simmons, 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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 very 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 extremely 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:Uklaweditor. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Uklaweditor|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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your concern.

I am sure you will agree that law firm pages on wikipedia are some of the saddest pages to exist, do not provide any information and are mostly out of date (compare to banks / other professional services firms such as the Big Four). I do not get paid to edit wikipedia pages but I wanted to make law firm wikipedia pages read better so it showcases their work and the incredible legal industry of the UK that the whole world is envious of. I was going to edit pages for other British law firms as well but if the editors believe that the current pages look better than the one I had edited to - I am happy to let it be and not edit any further.

If editors think I have made the edits in a non-neutral way, happy for it to be edited to be neutral. But please do something about these law firm pages.

I will not be making any further edits and will leave it to the veterans like yourself. Uklaweditor (talk) 11:11, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Charles Russell Speechlys (December 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jamiebuba 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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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:Charles Russell Speechlys 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.

Jamiebuba (talk) 22:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Uklaweditor! 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! Jamiebuba (talk) 22:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Charles Russell Speechlys

Hello, Uklaweditor. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Charles Russell Speechlys, 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) 15:02, 14 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Charles Russell Speechlys

Hello, Uklaweditor. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Charles Russell Speechlys".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! Hey man im josh (talk) 15:43, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]