User talk:ACombeEA

This is ACombeEA'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.

Your submission at Articles for creation: European co-operation for Accreditation (January 5)

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

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 organizations and companies). 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.

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, ACombeEA! Having an article 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! Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

January 2022

Hello ACombeEA. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation, 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:ACombeEA. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=ACombeEA|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. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 11:43, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation, 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:ACombeEA, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=ACombeEA|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 13:52, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

ACombeEA (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC) Dear Cub Safe Charmer, thank you for your comments. EA is a non-for profit association, we do not have any financial interest, our only mission was given by the European Commission to harmonize the application of standards in Europe to guarantee safer products and services for citizens. On the message written above my article after your review, it indicated that I could add references and submit again, which I did with several references to our relationship with the European Commission. I'm sorry if I did something wrong. Our only wish was to explain simply who we are and link our wikipedia page to pages from our existing members and partners present on Wikipedia already, and help citizens who are contacting us to understand our relationship with local authorities. I hope I'm answering you inthe right section. ACombeEA (talk) 14:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ACombeEA: The messages on your talk page were meant to alert you to the existence of Wikipedia's mandatory and non-negotiable paid editing disclosure policy, and your required compliance with it. Therefore, before making any further edits to the draft article, you must clearly state your relationship with this organization in the manner described above.

Wikipedia makes no distinction between for-profit businesses and non-profit organizations. If you are employed by this organization, then that is enough to invoke the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirement. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Drm310: Dear Drm310, thank you for your message, I understand better now. I added the mention that Cub Safe Charmer wrote above on my userpage, is it enough for the page to be submitted again, or was it completly rejected? Thanks again for your helpACombeEA (talk) 16:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@ACombeEA: Your submission was rejected. Wikipedia requires an organization to have significant coverage from multiple sources considered reliable and independent of the organization itself. These sources are used to determine if the organization is notable enough for inclusion. Lack of in-depth coverage from third-party sources means that a topic will not be considered notable.

Please be aware that Wikipedia is not interested in what an organization's representatives wish to say about it; only what independent sources have chosen on their own to publish about it. Readers of Wikipedia expect to find articles about notable topics, neutrally worded and sourced reliably, written independently of their subjects. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: European co-operation for Accreditation (January 5)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Mcmatter was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This is a brochure written by the organization for the organization, not an encyclopedia article.

McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 15:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation

Hello, ACombeEA. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation, 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) 13:05, 8 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:European co-operation for Accreditation

Hello, ACombeEA. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "European co-operation for Accreditation".

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 deleted. If 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.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:08, 5 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]