User talk:IceNineRoot

This is IceNineRoot'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: Hidrosan (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 DoubleGrazing were:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Hidrosan 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) 08:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, IceNineRoot! 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) 08:00, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

January 2025

Hello IceNineRoot. 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 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:IceNineRoot. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=IceNineRoot|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) 08:01, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for making the disclosure on your user page. However, you have used the generic COI template, and you need to use the more specific paid-editing COI one instead: {{Paid}}. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:28, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Thank you for the feedback, I have updated my user page. Best Regards. IceNineRoot (talk) 09:52, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Hidrosan

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Hidrosan, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:02, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To whom it may concern, The page has been written in the same form of similiar companies registered in Wikipedia. The methods and the language used in the text is same, so please excuse my conufion. How can other companies in the same field have Wikipedia pages that does not considered as advertisment (e.g. Aventics). The regarding company "Hidrosan" is a 30 years old establishment and aims to explain its history to public, nothing else. The products part might have seen as "advertisment", eventhough it was not our intention, that section can be removed. We would like you to reconsider the situation only containing the bacnjground and history part of the company. Best Regards IceNineRoot (talk) 09:48, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you may have misunderstood what Wikipedia is. This is an encyclopaedia, not a business directory. It isn't enough that a business exists, it must meet our definition of notable business, which in simple terms means that multiple secondary sources (mainly print and broadcast media) which are reliable and entirely independent of it have on their own decided to publish extensive content about the business and why they consider it to be worthy of note.

Your job is then to summarise what such sources have said. Your draft didn't cite a single third-party-source, only your company's own website. We have no interest in what you wish to tell the world about your business; that is considered pure promotion (see WP:YESPROMO), and is not allowed on Wikipedia.

It is also worth noting that unlike eg. LinkedIn, where you are expected to create and manage your company's 'profile' (after all, if you don't do it, who else would?), here the expectation is just the opposite: most articles are written by editors who have no relationship whatsoever with the subject they write about. If you do have such a relationship, this gives rise to a conflict of interest (COI), which must be disclosed, and which also imposes editing restrictions on you.

Note also that if an article on your business is accepted, it does not belong to you in any sense, and you have no control over its contents; it will be open for anyone to edit, including adding or changing content in a way that you might not like.

Finally, it is pointless comparing your draft to existing articles; this is the so-called WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS argument, which is a fallacy. We do not assess drafts by comparison to existing articles, but instead with reference to the applicable policies and guidelines, which all new articles must comply with. There are any number of problematic articles among the nearly 7 million in the English-language Wikipedia. Some of them were created before our new article review processes were introduced; some even pre-date our current notability etc. guidelines. As this is an entirely volunteer-based project, we can only deal with issues that are brought to our attention, so if you find articles that don't meet our guidelines, you are very welcome to improve them, or at least highlight their issues with maintenance tags. In any case, the existence of problematic articles is no reason to create more such problems. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:06, 5 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]