User talk:Victor4SDGs

This is Victor4SDGs'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: Advocacy Unified Network (May 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 Tol 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'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:

This draft only relies on primary sources as references. Wikipedia articles should primarily be based on secondary sources. Please add some secondary sources supporting this draft's claims.

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:Advocacy Unified Network 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:Advocacy Unified Network, 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.

Tol (talk | contribs) @ 02:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Victor4SDGs! 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! Tol (talk | contribs) @ 02:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Advocacy Unified Network (May 7)

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

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:Advocacy Unified Network 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:Advocacy Unified Network, 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 the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be tagged for G13 deletion.
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.

Modussiccandi (talk) 16:34, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Fatehpur Sikri. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. [1] MrOllie (talk) 20:00, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am incredibly sorry if I have violated any guidelines of Wikipedia by any means. First, let me clarify that I am not associated with the website or its parent body. I work for the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals and got the reference for this organization from the United Nations Civil Society organizations' list. I follow the non-profit organizations working for SDGs and want to enhance the Wikipedia encyclopedia with relevant, trusted, authentic, original content. The external link that I have added to Fatehpur Sikri is pertinent and provides correct information about the direct descendants of Hazrat Salim Chisti, the 15th-century saint for whom Fatehpur Sikri is famous. There are some pages on Wikipedia which is filled with misleading information about the descendants of the saint and Fatehpur Sikri while not mentioning the real people who are also accredited by the Government of India, which I came to know while studying the pre-colonial history of the British colonies in my fellowship studies of the Rockefeller Foundation in the association of UNESCO. The Hazrat Salim Chisti Foundation lobbied with the UNESCO and United Nations to get the UNESCO world heritage site status of Fatehpur Sikri. I have witnessed many Wikipedia pages and references, which is a gross violation of all the Wikipedia guidelines, including primary referencing. However, they are still actively present in the encyclopedia. Still, in this case, my impartial and authentic contribution is discarded, which I'll bring to the notice of UNESCO and the organization I work for. If you see the referencing of any article from the point of view of promoting that website or organization from which the article is generated, in that case, more than 80% of Wikipedia pages violate the guidelines. Suppose this is the policy of Wikipedia in my case. In that case, I'll stop wasting my time from today onwards in contributing to this encyclopedia for which I used to fight with my professors in my college days when they discouraged all our classmates from citing Wikipedia articles as references. Please forgive me if I have hurt you personally in any way. I never intended to, but it feels terrible when the precious time you invested in a noble cause without any profit motive gets wasted. Victor4SDGs (talk) 22:27, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are the third account who has been repetitively adding links to this organization - there is a clear pattern of promotion going on here. If more links or mentions of this organization are added - by any account - I would expect that it will be added to Wikipedia's spam blacklist. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for promotion, not even for non profits or worthy causes. MrOllie (talk) 23:10, 17 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

October 2022

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 14:23, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this undisclosed payment tag is unnecessary, uncalled for and unwanted. If you want I can present my employment details which is self-explanatory evidence of my unassociated status with this organization or any organization like the one. This is my first page creation attempt in Wikipedia and that's why I am interested in completing it. And as stated previously also, I am working for achievement of SDGs. I have gone through the policy, terms and conditions of Wikipedia and always tried to comply with those. Due to which, after rejection twice, I did some thorough research and came up with some significant reference regarding this article. As you are an experienced and senior editor in Wikipedia, I seek your guidance and advice regarding this article. But please do not scrap this article if you find the references notable and in compliance with Wikipedia guidelines. Victor4SDGs (talk) 23:41, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My advice is: That draft is an obvious advert. The sources do not come even close to meeting Wikipedia's inclusion requirements. I am sure that when it is reviewed, it will be rejected. I simply do not believe that an unconflicted editor would look at that and think it is an acceptable Wikipedia article. The removals of maintenance tags and submission decline notices has got to stop. If by some chance you really don't have anything to do with this organization, I suggest you walk away from the draft and find something better to occupy your time with. MrOllie (talk) 23:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your advice. Actually, I want to create a Wikipedia article for some organizations or entities engaged in Sustainable development. Can you please suggest a suitable subject to start a new report? My only wish is to create a new Wikipedia article associated with SDGs that will add some additional value to this encyclopedia also. I shall be obliged if you assist me in my experiment. Victor4SDGs (talk) 01:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest picking a biography off of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red/Redlist index to start. Biographies are usually a bit easier to start with than articles on active organizations, particularly when the article subject isn't still alive. - MrOllie (talk) 01:29, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Advocacy Unified Network (October 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 Greenman was:

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:

See WP:COI.

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:Advocacy Unified Network 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.

Greenman (talk) 08:39, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Advocacy Unified Network

Hello, Victor4SDGs. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Advocacy Unified Network, 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) 15:03, 18 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

August 2024

Hello Victor4SDGs. 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:Victor4SDGs. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Victor4SDGs|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. MrOllie (talk) 00:59, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]