User talk:Ryuaelv1407

Minor edits

Hi Ryuaelv1407! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. — Manticore 01:51, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Swiss Stem Cell has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Swiss Stem Cell. Thanks! LittlePuppers (talk) 05:22, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Swiss Stem Cell (September 9)

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

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.

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is worded so much like a press release, I'd be surprised to find out it wasn't one. The article states: "In association with Swiss medical, wellness and R&D teams, we strive to develop high-quality..." ...but who is "we"? There are several examples of similar wording to this, but this article needs to be written in an encyclopedic tone first and foremost.

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:Swiss Stem Cell 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.

Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ryuaelv1407! 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! Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 06:43, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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 the submission 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.

Ryuaelv1407 (talk) 01:15, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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 the submission 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.

Ryuaelv1407 (talk) 02:43, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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 the submission 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.

Ryuaelv1407 (talk) 07:44, 11 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Replaceable non-free use File:Olivia Julianna.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Olivia Julianna.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of non-free use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of non-free use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:

Go to the file description page and add the text {{Di-replaceable non-free use disputed|<your reason>}} below the original replaceable non-free use template, replacing <your reason> with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.
On the file discussion page, write a full explanation of why you believe the file is not replaceable.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification, per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Ирука¹³ 01:46, 12 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to your Articles for Creation Help Desk question

Hello, Ryuaelv1407! I'm StartOkayStop. I have replied to your question about a submission at the WikiProject Articles for Creation Help Desk. StartOkayStop (talk) 04:10, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Swiss Stem Cell (September 14)

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 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.

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Mostly unreferenced.

No evidence of notability.

Highly promotional in tone and content.

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:Swiss Stem Cell 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) 08:10, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

Hello Ryuaelv1407. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Swiss Stem Cell, 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:Ryuaelv1407. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ryuaelv1407|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) 08:12, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have a question. If I know the subject that I'm writing for the article, at the 'Wikipedia Article Wizard', should I choose I'm writing for myself, or a close person/subject ? Ryuaelv1407 (talk) 08:58, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't much matter what you say in the article wizard; if you say you know the subject, it will just tell you to make a COI disclosure before proceeding.

So you know Swiss Stem Cell, then? What is the nature of your relationship with them? (I'm asking again, since you for some reason deleted my earlier question.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:13, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I know the company, then. Its my first time using Wikipedia. So, I don't really know the disclosure or anything. So, I just have to put

{{paid|user=Ryuaelv1407|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}} this in my draft article? Ryuaelv1407 (talk) 09:19, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are being paid or otherwise compensated or rewarded, either directly or indirectly, then yes, you need to make a paid-editing disclosure. If you're absolutely sure that's not the case, but you still have a conflict (which by the sound of it, you do), then you make a COI disclosure. If you're not quite sure, then it's better to err on the side of caution and make the paid-editing one. Either way, the end result is pretty much the same, ie. you won't be able to publish the article directly yourself, you must go through the AfC review process, and once it is published (assuming) you cannot edit it directly but must propose changes via the article talk page. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:56, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've heavily edited that draft and removed a large amount of promotional material. At an absolute minimum, you must make the paid editor disclosure before making any other edits, especially since you've indicated this was a task given to you by your employer. Next, you must be very, very careful in editing where you have an obvious, paid conflict of interest; any more additions of blatant adcopy and puffery will likely result in this account being disabled. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:28, 14 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. The only sources that I can use for reference is from the company's website. Is it possible to use it? Ryuaelv1407 (talk) 01:15, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No. For any medical claims, we'll need WP:MEDRS. Since you've added more corny adcopy to the article like "premium quality anti-ageing therapeutic cellular extracts" after my explicit warning, I've blocked this account. It's clear you're being compelled to spam us. Sam Kuru (talk) 11:11, 15 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of File:Davika Hoorne.jpg

A tag has been placed on File:Davika Hoorne.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the file appears to be a blatant copyright infringement of Images of Hoorne are available o Commons so this file does not qualify for free use on Wikipedia.. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use it — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. ɴᴋᴏɴ21 ❯❯❯ talk 18:58, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Davika Hoorne.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Davika Hoorne.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 02:12, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Zee Pruk Panich (November 4)

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

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 people). 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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Thank you for your submission, but half of the sources in the draft seem to be unreliable. For example, this just looks like spam; this is a blog; and this is literally a reddit post. Please remove unreliable sources and replace or remove the cited content. In addition to that, please add more sources that discuss this actor in detail, not just saying he was casted in x.

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:Zee Pruk Panich 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.

Ca ^{talk to me!} 15:44, 4 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Swiss Stem Cell

Hello, Ryuaelv1407. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Swiss Stem Cell, 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) 12:06, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]