User talk:Sign Design XYZ

This is Sign Design XYZ'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: Digital Journalism (journal) (October 6)

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

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:Digital Journalism (journal) 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:Digital Journalism (journal), 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.

GeneralPoxter (talk) 12:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Sign Design XYZ! 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! GeneralPoxter (talk) 12:45, 6 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Journalism (journal) (October 14)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

The draft's sources currently consist of a primary source, a long list of faculty, and a database listing.

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:Digital Journalism (journal) 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:Digital Journalism (journal), 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 11:49, 14 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Digital Journalism (journal) has been accepted

Digital Journalism (journal), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 01:39, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of SCM Studies in Communication and Media

The article SCM Studies in Communication and Media has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Non-notable journal. Not indexed in any selective databases, no independent sources. Does not meet WP:NJournals or WP:GNG.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Randykitty (talk) 17:52, 17 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Studies in Communication and Media for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Studies in Communication and Media is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Studies in Communication and Media until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Randykitty (talk) 17:40, 19 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Sign Design XYZ. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 09:52, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify, it appears that all of your recent edits in the past couple of years have cited someone named Nicola Döring. If you are or know this person, you have a conflict of interest and should familiarize yourself with the above guidelines. Thank you. Grayfell (talk) 09:54, 11 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In sex research, Nicola Döring is a very well-known name, so it's logical that her name comes up among the authors or co-authors of related papers. I am a researcher, so I read these papers often (as well as papers of other reseachers whom I also cited in my past edits). Since I am not being paid for mentioning her name, I don't think that constitutes any conflicht of interest. Sign Design XYZ (talk) 09:04, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

From my perspective, most of your edits spanning several years have cited this person. Other editors have also cited this person, but not nearly as many.

Additionally, many of your edits are inappropriate in how they cite this person. Many of your edits have added original research which WP:SYNTHes sources together to support broad claims. For example, this edit added content to the subsection on 'definitions' but in addition to majore WP:TONE and WP:NPOV issues, it also had very little to do with 'definitions'. This gives the impression that you are adding content for the sake of adding content, which is indistinguishable from spamming.

To put it more simply, please do not ad original research. Avoid citing sources as examples. Instead, use independent sources to decide what is and is not a helpful example.

I will also add that MDPI is not a reputable publisher and should be avoided for citations.

The essay WP:BACKWARDS may also be helpful. Grayfell (talk) 22:01, 12 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]