User talk:Visortelle

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apache Pulsar (November 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Vanderwaalforces were: 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:Apache Pulsar 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) 12:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Visortelle! 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) 12:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apache Pulsar (November 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Vanderwaalforces were:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Apache Pulsar 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) 12:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I'll add more references.

Some sections only referenced pages from the project documentation. Is it ok?

What exactly do you find promotional?

Things I think probably looks promotional and can be fixed:

1. Get rid of comparison with Apache Kafka here.

> In comparison with offset-based systems like Apache Kafka, in Pulsar all messages are acknowledged individually.

=>

> In Pulsar, messages can be consumed and acknowledged individually or consumed as streams.

2. Get rid of the Comparison with Other Systems section?

3. Remove the word "fastest" here?

> Overall, Pulsar provides similar performance characteristics to its fastest competitors. Visortelle (talk) 13:11, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apache Pulsar (November 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Tails Wx were:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Apache Pulsar 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.

Tails Wx 14:08, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apache Pulsar (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 Kilaseell was: 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:Apache Pulsar 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.

– Kilaseell - Message me! - 14:53, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello. What would you recommend to fix in the Apache Pulsar article?

I'm looking at the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_Kafka article as on reference and don't see much difference in the amount or quality of references. Visortelle (talk) 14:57, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apache Pulsar (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 Kilaseell was: 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:Apache Pulsar 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.

– Kilaseell - Message me! - 15:20, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023

Hello Visortelle. The nature of your edits 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:Visortelle. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Visortelle|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. 331dot (talk) 15:22, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, 331dot. No, I didn't and will not intend to receive any money for this article.

All the pre-history is here. https://github.com/apache/pulsar/issues/21514

I work on a project that uses Apache Pulsar, and I think that Pulsar is a great technology and it’s a shame that it doesn’t have a Wikipedia article. Visortelle (talk) 15:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Also, I noticed that you marked the Pulsar logo.

It's a project from the Apache Foundation, and of course, it's under the Apache 2.0 license.

From my understanding, it's CC-compatible. How can we fix the logo removal request? Visortelle (talk) 15:29, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Here is the link with Apache 2.0. <=> CC license compatibility discussion.

https://softwareengineering.stackexchange.com/questions/170185/is-creative-commons-license-compatible-with-apache-license Visortelle (talk) 15:30, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Note that Wikipedia is not interested in popularizing any technology or product. Our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources say about the subject. Based on the GitHub that you linked to, you seem to have a stronger interest in this topic than just a mere user, perhaps triggering the (unpaid)conflict of interest disclosure requirements.

Most of the draft seems to have little to do with platform itself, and mostly discusses the broader concept and its technical functions. The code examples are not relevant and should just be removed; Wikipedia is typically written by lay people for lay people, summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a subject, showing how it is notable as Wikipedia defines the term. This basically means that the article should mainly discuss what independent sources see as important/significant/influential about this platform. I think you will need to radically rework your draft.

As for the image, perhaps I misunderstand it, but the license provided seems to carry requirements that are stricter than Wikipedia's. The only requirment Wikipedia has for "free" images(in terms of copyright) is that attribution be provided if an image is used. The license linked to with the image imposes other requirements;

You must give any other recipients of the Work or Derivative Works a copy of this License; and

You must cause any modified files to carry prominent notices stating that You changed the files; and

You must retain, in the Source form of any Derivative Works that You distribute, all copyright, patent, trademark, and attribution notices from the Source form of the Work, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works; and

If the Work includes a "NOTICE" text file as part of its distribution, then any Derivative Works that You distribute must include a readable copy of the attribution notices contained within such NOTICE file, excluding those notices that do not pertain to any part of the Derivative Works, in at least one of the following places: within a NOTICE text file distributed as part of the Derivative Works; within the Source form or documentation, if provided along with the Derivative Works; or, within a display generated by the Derivative Works, if and wherever such third-party notices normally appear. The contents of the NOTICE file are for informational purposes only and do not modify the License. You may add Your own attribution notices within Derivative Works that You distribute, alongside or as an addendum to the NOTICE text from the Work, provided that such additional attribution notices cannot be construed as modifying the License. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

> Note that Wikipedia is not interested in popularizing any technology or product.

I totally understand and I removed all text that can be considered as promotional. Do you have anything specific in mind that can be as promotional?

I asked CatGPT, does this article looks promotional. Here is it's answer:

> The article provided appears to be informational rather than promotional. It outlines the features, history, core concepts, architecture, and components of Apache Pulsar. The language used is factual and technical, focusing on explaining what Apache Pulsar is, how it operates, and what functionalities it offers.

---

> Based on the GitHub that you linked to, you seem to have a stronger interest in this topic than just a mere user

For now, I just volunteering time to time. This wikipedia article is the same act of volunteering.

I don't understand why user who isn't interested in this topic would write a wikipedia article.

It requires quite a long time dig into the topic to summarize and write anything here.

If nobody from the Pulsar parent company employees didn't write an article yet, why can't I try do it? I just don't understand it.

You're volunteering on Wikipedia, right? I volunteering for the Apache Foundation - also non-profit organization.

> Most of the draft seems to have little to do with platform itself, and mostly discusses the broader concept and its technical functions.

I can't agree with you here. It describes a set of Pulsar features, and how they work.

Different platforms have different sets of features.

> The code examples are not relevant and should just be removed.

OK. I can remove them. A thought that it would be nice to show some kind of hello-world example.

Here is a chicken-egg problem. There are lot of materials in Chinese that I can't use as references here.

Also there are lot of materials , that I also can't use as references.

---

I'll re-read you answer on the license in details soon. Visortelle (talk) 15:56, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I think the best would be to compare it with the existing article on Apache Kafka and together try to figure out what aligns with Wikipedia rules in the Kafka article, but doesn't in the proposed draft on Pulsar.

That would be unopinionated and fair. Visortelle (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

When linking to another Wikipedia article or page, the whole url is not required- the title of the target just needs to be placed in double brackets like this [[Apache Kafka]], as I've done here. Each article is considered on its own merits, not in comparison to other articles which might too be problematic, see other stuff exists. 331dot (talk) 16:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I've marked that article as needing assistance, as it has similar problems to your draft. 331dot (talk) 16:26, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Regarding the image.

I re-read your message and related articles. Still don't understand what should I do to fix it.

Even the ASF logo itself has the same set of fields.

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:ASF_Logo.svg

These guys are licensing geeks. If something would be wrong with it, we would know.

I added same set of attributes to the Pulsar logo - checksum, width, height, MIME type, data size. Visortelle (talk) 17:04, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm admittedly not an expert on image copyright, but I know that images on Commons must allow for reuse with attribution; the license on the logo carries additional requirements for reuse; retaining a copy of the license, requires modified files to carry prominent notices stating that you changed the files, etc. 331dot (talk) 17:23, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, but I still don't understand you.

The author is set. The source is set. I didn't change the file.

There are tons of images with the Apache 2.0. license uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons.

You could probably point me to the "other stuff exists" article one more time, but there is even a category of such images:

https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Category:Apache_License

Do they all should be marked to deletion, or they have some attributes I don't see, that should be added to the image that I uploaded? Visortelle (talk) 17:34, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

The logo could probably be on this Wikipedia directly, just not on commons. 331dot (talk) 17:24, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Also, I sometimes contribute to the Pulsar site content.

Here is the full list of my contributions:

https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pulls?q=is%3Apr+author%3Avisortelle+is%3Aclosed Visortelle (talk) 15:36, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Volunteering for the Apache Foundation is a direct conflict of interest that you must disclose, please see WP:COI for instructions.

On Wikipedia there is no difference between "informational" and "promotional". Wikipedia is not for merely providing information, nor is it merely for telling the world about something(even if without blatant persuasion); it is for summarizing independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose on their own to say about a topic and what makes it important- what we term notability. Pretty much anything else is considered promotional here.

Wikipedia articles are typically written by editors who take note of coverage of a topic in independent reliable sources and choose to write about it. This does require some level of personal interest, but it doesn't require that the interest be particularly deep, or that someone be an active user of the subject they are editing about.

References do not need to be in English- though they will be harder to evaluate as a reviewer will need to know Chinese.

To pass the submission process, the draft needs to be much less about the technical information and features, and needs to discuss what independent sources say is important about this platform. That's my opinion, feel free to ask others at the AFC Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 16:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed answer.

> Volunteering for the Apache Foundation is a direct conflict of interest that you must disclose

That didn't come to my mind that it applies also for non-profit organizations.

Sure, I'll disclose it, just will find how to do it.

I removed the Core Concept section because it mostly summarizes the Pulsar dcumentation.

I leaved only small list facts. What the project is about and very brief overview of it's architecture.

Probably someone else will fill the article over time. Start small. :) Visortelle (talk) 16:25, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia draws no distinction between for-profit and non-profit organizations. Instructions for disclosing may be found at WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 16:27, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

I added the COI template to my user profile: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Visortelle Visortelle (talk) 16:33, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Apache Pulsar (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 WikiOriginal-9 was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Apache Pulsar 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.

WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 17:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Logo

You've now uploaded the logo and claimed that you personally created it. This too is improper, unless you indeed personally created it and want to make it available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution(which would be incompatible with the licences you have shown me which carry additional requirements for reusing the logo).

Logos are typically uploaded to this Wikipedia locally(not Commons) and used under "fair use" rules- which does carry some restrictions, like being unable to be used in drafts- but it does allow for use in regular articles.

Images are not relevant to the draft approval process anyway, which only considers the text and sources. 331dot (talk) 14:43, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

I got the logo from a designer who is an employee of the company that sponsoring Pulsar.

I added it to the official Pulsar site here: https://github.com/apache/pulsar-site/pull/647

How to upload it locally? The only "add image" button in the editor adds it to commons. Visortelle (talk) 14:49, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

See the File Upload Wizard to upload to this specific Wikipedia. You'll need to click "non-free file". You will also need to have the one you uploaded to Commons deleted. 331dot (talk) 14:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah, ok. It tells me that the article doesn't exist yet and I'll be able to add it after it is published.

Actually, would be nice to add the button to the UI. Visortelle (talk) 14:56, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

• When you link to another Wikipedia article or page, doing so as a bare url locks readers in to the desktop version of Wikipedia, even if their preferred version is the mobile. It's preferred to link to other articles or pages by placing the title of the target in double brackets, like this [[Joe Biden]] appears as Joe Biden. It also makes posts cleaner to read. You don't need to go back and change things, this is just advice for the future. Non-Wikipedia links need to be urls, though. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

  > a bare url locks readers in to the desktop version of Wikipedia

  Thanks for the explanation. Not I see the reason why should I do it this way.

  IMHO, it can and should be handled automatically by the Wikipedia engine. Looks not hard to implement. If something can be automated in order to provide a better UX and avoid human interaction, it probably should. Visortelle (talk) 08:41, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Apache Pulsar

Hello, Visortelle. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Apache Pulsar".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 14:06, 9 May 2024 (UTC)