Jump to content

User talk:Saxsxen

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


October 2020

[edit]
Information icon

Hello Saxsxen. 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:Saxsxen. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Saxsxen|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. — Blablubbs (talk • contribs) 19:51, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello @Blablubbs:, thank you for your feedback and sorry for the delay in answering you. I am not being paid for my edits. I am a Xenocs employee from France and I have seen that the Small Angle X-Ray scattering Wikipedia webpage mentions Xenocs as one of the 6 SAXS instrument providers in the world, with Xenocs being the only one with no wikipedia webpage. Hence my contribution. Also, Xenocs is mentionned a lot in Google Scholar (quoted in about 2800 scientific publications).

--Saxsxen (talk) 13:25, 21 January 2021 (UTC)Saxsxen, 21/01/2021[reply]

Hi @Saxsxen. If you're editing as part of your job, that still makes you a paid editor, even if you're not hired through an external company. If you're editing this as a private person, you still have a conflict of interest that you should disclose. Best, Blablubbs|talk 13:30, 21 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Blablubbs:, thank you for your help. This is getting very technical for me. I guess I can say I am a paid editor since I am a Xenocs employee. So I guess both 'employer' and 'client' should be filled with Xenocs? {paid|user=Saxsxen|employer=Xenocs|client=Xenocs}}. What should I do next? Thanks, Best, Saxsxen (talk) 14:43, 22 January 2021 (UTC)Saxsxen, 15h41, 22/01/21[reply]
Hello @Blablubbs, I hope you are well. Any update for me on this? Many thanks in advance for your help.

Saxsxen (talk) 08:13, 10 February 2021 (UTC)Saxsxen, Feb 10, 2021[reply]


Your submission at Articles for creation: Xenocs (October 6)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Blablubbs 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.
— Blablubbs (talk • contribs) 19:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Saxsxen! 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! — Blablubbs (talk • contribs) 19:54, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Xenocs

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Saxsxen. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Xenocs, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Blablubbs, I have received the bot-delivered message above. Could you please help me or advise me on how to proceed to have the webpage I have submitted accepted ? Many thanks. Cheers.Saxsxen (talk) 18:03, 15 March 2021 (UTC) Saxsxen[reply]
Hi @Blablubbs, many thanks for your help & answer on your user talk webpage. From your experience, would the citations below be enough to meet the notability guideline for corporations? Do you think I can resubmit the article if I include the following citations?:;[1];[2];[3].[4] Thanks! Saxsxen (talk) 15:07, 18 March 2021 (UTC)Saxsxen Saxsxen[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Xenocs (July 9)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by HighKing 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 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.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
The topic is about an organization therefore WP:NCORP is the appropriate guideline. None of the references meet the criteria for establishing notability as per NCORP.
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.
HighKing++ 21:27, 9 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Hello HighKing, thank you for your message. SAXS is a proven technique to study proteins, viruses or any nanostructured material (see [5]). With the current pandemic, it is used at the various stages of the drug and vaccine development process. There are only 5 manufacturers of SAXS lab equipments in the world (see markets studies on SAXS market, such as,[6] the 6th supplier SAXSLAB was acquired by Xenocs in 2019), all of them have a Wikipedia webpage except Xenocs (see Rigaku, Bruker, AntonPaar & Panalytical wikipedia webpages). I’d like to fill the blank and provide a Wikipedia webpage on Xenocs. Would this meet Wikipedia’s requirements for creating a wiki page? Are market studies significant/independent/reliable/secondary sources? Thanks for your help! Best, Saxsxen (talk) 07:35, 12 September 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]

Hi Saxsxen, I would like to see an reference where the author/journalist is writing about the company, something where that author/journalist is providing their own opinion/analysis/etc on the company. Market studies (or Analyst Reports) are perfectly acceptable for establishing notability. We need two sources (different) to establish notability. Assuming this from 360 is one source, can you find another? HighKing++ 14:12, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi HighKing, thanks. I've found another market study: marketsandresearch[1]. Can you tell me what I should do next? Thanks again,Saxsxen (talk) 15:53, 16 September 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]
Hi Saxsxen, great! If you add that reference into the article, resubmit and it should get accepted. Or ping me here and I'll accept it. HighKing++ 19:14, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://physicsworld.com/a/flash-physics-spacex-resumes-space-flights-xenocs-buys-saxslab-snolab-bags-c26m/
  2. ^ https://www.iucr.org/outreach/openlabs/grenoble-darmstadt
  3. ^ https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=xenocs&hl=en&as_sdt=0,5
  4. ^ https://www.mrl.ucsb.edu/x-ray-facility/instruments/small-angle-x-ray-scattering-saxs-diffractometer
  5. ^ https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Small-angle_X-ray_scattering
  6. ^ https://www.ktvn.com/story/44561779/global-small-angle-x-ray-scattering-(saxs)-)
Hi HighKing, thanks for your help and advice. I have added the reference into the article.
Hi HighKing, as suggested I have resubmited and the article has not been accepted. Can you help please? Many thanks Saxsxen (talk) 12:33, 20 September 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]
Hi HighKing, have I misundertood and should I add the two market study references instead of just one? Thank you for helping me! Best, Saxsxen (talk) 09:21, 26 September 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]
Hi Saxsxen, best if you please add both references incorporated into the article, otherwise other editors cannot determine that there is adequate sourcing. Ping me here when you've added those references and I'll check it out. HighKing++ 11:24, 1 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Hi HighKing, I have added both references into the article. Thanks for your help. Best, Saxsxen (talk) 12:17, 3 October 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]
Hi HighKing, no news from you since early October. I have followed your advice and have added the 2 references as discussed above. Is this OK? Is there anything else I should do for you to be able to accept the article? Many thanks again for your help. Cheers Saxsxen (talk) 10:43, 14 November 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]
I accepted the article back in early October - you can see it at Xenocs. I assumed you would see that. HighKing++ 22:20, 14 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you so much HighKing!, I hadn't seen it!! many thanks again for your great advice & help. All the best Saxsxen (talk) 17:14, 15 November 2021 (UTC)saxsxen[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Xenocs (September 19)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong 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. 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.
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.
Theroadislong (talk) 11:04, 19 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Saxsxen&oldid=1055398071"