User talk:SparrowsQuest

This is SparrowsQuest's talk page, where you can send her 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.

Welcome!

Hello, SparrowsQuest, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Best practices for editors with close associations
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style
The Teahouse, our help forum for new editors

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:56, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart H. Schwartz (October 16)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please don't cite unreliable journals.

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:Stuart H. Schwartz 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.

Johannes (Talk) (Contribs) (Articles) 23:37, 16 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart H. Schwartz (October 17)

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 does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Stuart H. Schwartz 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, SparrowsQuest! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 21:09, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz. Thanks! S0091 (talk) 21:27, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart H. Schwartz (November 22)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Every material statement must be sourced.

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:Stuart H. Schwartz 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.

Qcne (talk) 13:24, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart H. Schwartz (November 22)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

The education section lacks citations.

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:Stuart H. Schwartz 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.

voorts (talk/contributions) 18:10, 22 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart H. Schwartz (November 23)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

Only two minor edits since last decline, issues need to be addressed.

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:Stuart H. Schwartz 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.

— MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:54, 23 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Stuart H. Schwartz (March 21)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Strong WP:NPOV concerns. Review WP:Wikipuffery and consider if it applies to ...controversial notion that the failing newspaper industry... or ...transform floundering.... Secondly, if a lot of these sources are about his methods and not the subject of the article (as Additionally among his recommendations to increase advertising and circulation were to shorten articles, add more visual elements, write eye-catching headlines, and feature more articles on subjects of interest to the general public, including a greater focus on local news.^[15] would imply), then his notability is not established, per WP:NBIO (see WP:NOTINHERITED); however if the sources are about the subject, then the aforementioned text is non-ecyclopedic and only serves to promote the subject (again failing WP:NPOV). —

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:Stuart H. Schwartz 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.

microbiologyMarcus ^{[petri dish·growths]} 19:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May 2024

Hello SparrowsQuest. 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 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:SparrowsQuest. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=SparrowsQuest|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. I note you have disclosed a COI. This is a question about the nature of that COI. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:55, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your reply.

In my attempt to comply with Wikipedia's standards I may have misunderstood what a COI is. I am not employed by or paid by or represent the subject of the article. I recently became acquainted with him and was fascinated by his collection of clippings from his career. I was spurred by curiosity to do further research into his influence in his field and discovered that he had numerous articles written about him, not only in trade journals but in the Wall Street Journal and other periodicals as well as books, and he was also the subject of a PBS news segment on Inside Story, which I've since acquired from a digital archive at Vanderbilt. I wrote the article because I thought others might find his story as interesting as I do. Does this qualify as a COI? If not, can I remove the COI declaration? Thank you again for your help.

~~~~ SparrowsQuest (talk) 21:26, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I believe your acquaintanceship is sufficient for COI and full transparency is recommended. I understand that you receive no compensation, broadly construed. This question is answered fully now and you have done everything correctly.

If you have found numerous articles written about him then it seems you have not availed yourself of them as references.

Your task is to prove that he passes WP:BIO. Let me remind you what is required:

For a living person we have a high standard of referencing. Every substantive fact you assert, especially one that is susceptible to potential challenge, requires a citation with a reference that is about them, and is independent of them, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS, and is significant coverage. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact cited, that meet these tough criteria is likely to make this draft a clear acceptance (0.9 probability). Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the person is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:41, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz. Thanks! 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 21:31, 29 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz

Hello, SparrowsQuest. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz, 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) 22:07, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Stuart H. Schwartz

Hello, SparrowsQuest. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Stuart H. Schwartz".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, the draft has been deleted. When 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 21:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]