User talk:Write of way

Repost of Adam Bold

A tag has been placed on Adam Bold requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia, because it appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion process. If you can indicate how it is different from the previously posted material, contest the deletion by clicking on the button that looks like this: which appears inside of the speedy deletion ({{db-...}}) tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate). Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's discussion directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. If you believe the original discussion was unjustified, please contact the administrator who deleted the page or use deletion review instead of recreating the page. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 04:26, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest guideline

Hello, Write of way. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 17:35, 18 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adam Bold (June 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 MatthewVanitas was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of people and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Adam Bold and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Write of way, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! MatthewVanitas (talk) 18:22, 22 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adam Bold (July 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 Sulfurboy 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:Adam Bold and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Sulfurboy (talk) 05:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Write of way, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 05:20, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Follow up on conflict of interest of notice above

Hi Write of way -- I work on conflict of interest issues in Wikipedia. The two articles you have worked on, have been the subject of paid editing in the past. Would you please tell me if you or an agency you work for, have any relationship with Adam Bold, The Mutual Fund Show, or agencies or companies affiliated with them? If you do, it is not the end of the world, as a first step you just need to disclose it, per the Terms of Use of Wikipedia (described in the COI notice above). Please do respond. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

copy/pasted response at my Talk page here, to keep thread together. Jytdog (talk) 03:09, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - This is Write of Way. I'm new to Wiki and not sure how to respond to the COI comment. I do not work for an agency and am not an employee of Adam Bold or any affiliates. I do not personally know him. I used to work with one of his employees, Lisa. She asked if I would do a favor and write a bio page and some other pages that are related. I have rewritten the bio so that it is more objective.I realize the first version wasn't, but I believe it is now. The content may be similar, but it is sourced now and factual and doesn't sound like puffery. He is a notable person in the financial industry. Please let me know which part of the article you think is bias. I completely revised the article on the Mutual Fund Show so that it is neutral and sourced. Please let me know what specific issues you have with the content, if any. Thank you in advance for your time and consideration. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Write of way (talk • contribs) 18:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying! I cut your response from my Talk page and pasted it here, to keep the question and answer together. Really -thanks very much for replying, and for disclosing the relationship. That relationship does constitute a conflict of interest in Wikipedia. You care about your friend, your friend has been apparently been instructed to create these articles, and you are helping her. You have a stake in the matter and are not neutral. As I wrote above, these articles have been created several times under similar conflicts of interest, and each time they have been deleted by the community. Let me explain - this place is not a wild west - the community has created policies that govern what we do. The key policy for whether an article should exist or not (this comes up all the time, as you can imagine) is WP:NOTABILITY. There is a guideline that applies that policy to people - WP:BIO. There is no specific guideline for radio shows, so the general NOTABILITY policy applies. At a very high level, you can read WP:Golden Rule to get the flavor. Bottom line, is that there have not been enough independent, reliable sources about the person or the show for the articles about them to have a Wikipedia article. This has been decided several times now. It appears that people connected to Mr. Bold or his show want to use Wikipedia to promote the show, but the use of Wikipedia to promote anything (see WP:PROMO) is also against our policies here. So, please tell your friend Lisa that there is nothing that can be done at that time, as there are not enough independent, reliable sources about Mr Bold and his show to generate a Wikipedia article, according to Wikipedia's WP:NOTABILITY policy. If you have any questions, you can reply here. Thanks again for talking. Jytdog (talk) 03:19, 8 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

With regard to the conflict of interest, I didn't work closely with Lisa so I would not say that she is a "friend" as we do not have and never had a social relationship and do not even live in the same state. I also haven't worked in the financial industry for over five years. I don't know Bold or have a relationship with him. Does that still constitute a COI? How does a bio get put on Wiki - just by an author simply feeling inspired to write about someone? I would think the writer would likely know of the person they are writing about in some way or another. I don't see how my relationship is any different. In regard to his notability, Bold was consulted in Fox Business a number of times, wrote a book and his company, has more than 120 offices and 37,000 clients. If there were more independent sources that supported that, would he be notable? Or is is company, the Mutual Fund Store, what is notable, so that instead should be written about instead of him? Thank you for your help.

You care about your friend enough to want to do her a favor; the COI passes right through her to you. It is really simple. It is not a big deal and having a COI doesn't prevent you from creating an article. You should however disclose the COI at the article Talk page, and if the article gets through the "articles for creation" process you should not edit it, after it goes live. As for your other questions, I don't know what sources there are on him or his company, so I cannot comment. I do know that articles about him and his company have been deleted by the community twice now, and yours have been rejected at AfC. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a blog or a social media site - there are policies and guidelines that govern content; it is not just a wild-westy Facebook kind of place. It all comes down to whether there are independent*, reliable sources (per WP:RS) about him and his company; it is not personal nor subjective. There are enough such sources , or there are not! (*Note, we stress "independent" because you cannot build an article on press releases or personal websites - what is needed, are pieces in reputable sources like the NY Times or WSJ that discuss the subject at length; sources with passing mentions are not sufficient) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jytdog (talk • contribs) 20:51, 8 July 2015‎ (UTC) [reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mutual Fund Show (July 10)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Mutual Fund Show and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 07:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Write of way, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 07:51, 10 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Adam Bold concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Adam Bold, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 23:48, 1 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Mutual Fund Show concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Mutual Fund Show, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:59, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Mutual Fund Show

Hello, Write of way. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "Mutual Fund Show".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 21:41, 18 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]