User talk:Bob.Muenchen

June 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 22:22, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (March 6)[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 KylieTastic 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:

Requires significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources to show notability

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 User:Bob.Muenchen/sandbox 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 User:Bob.Muenchen/sandbox, 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, 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.

KylieTastic (talk) 15:03, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Bob.Muenchen! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 15:03, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bob.Muenchen/sandbox[edit]

Hello, Bob.Muenchen. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, User:Bob.Muenchen/sandbox.

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

January 2021[edit]

Hello Bob.Muenchen. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:BlueSky Statistics, 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:Bob.Muenchen. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Bob.Muenchen|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. Fiddle Faddle 22:50, 20 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Timtrent,

This is my second attempt to reply which didn't seem to get saved. Perhaps I'm not replying correctly though I did watch the Wikipedia video on how to use a talk page...

I'm glad you wrote to me about this issue as it's complicated & I would love to have advice as to how to proceed. Since 2005 I've done all I can to make the open-source R language more popular, writing books and setting up a website, r4stats.com. Today R is quite popular, but I believe it is nowhere near as popular as it will become when graphical user interfaces put more of R's power in the hands of non-programmers. That process is just beginning. To this end, I provide detailed advice to all eight of the R GUI development teams. This page summarizes my work: http://r4stats.com/articles/software-reviews/r-gui-comparison/, and it links to detailed reviews of each. After providing this advice, the BlueSky LLC guys gave me 2% of the company. That's probably worth zero at the moment, but it is certainly a potential conflict of interest. However, that has not stopped me from continuing to help the other teams. For example, my support of jamovi (probably the strongest BlueSky competitor) is acknowledged here: https://blog.jamovi.org/2019/05/24/jamovi-one-zero.html.

The second conflict of interest is the books I've written to help people use the software.

I had hoped to minimize the conflict by writing a Wikipedia page containing only easily verifiable facts. But as the main person who has documented the software, it leaves me quite confused as to how to do that without referring to my own work.

Beyond all that, I was not compensated for writing that entry. What do you think I should do?

Thanks, Bob.Muenchen (talk) 19:59, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Broadly construed, are you employed by, contracted to, or rewarded in any manner, financial or otherwise, by Blue Sky Statistics? 2% ownership suggests the answer to be affirmative.

This mean that you are duty bound to make formal disclosure (0.9 probability). It means that you may proceed with drafting the article, but may not edit it once it is approved Fiddle Faddle 23:46, 22 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I tried to use the HTML string you provided & got the message that I needed to use this form instead:

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

Bob.Muenchen (talk · contribs) has been paid by BlueSky Statistics LLC on their behalf.

. That's on the talk page for the proposed article. Does it look like I've done the right thing? Thanks, Bob MuenchenBob.Muenchen (talk) 11:21, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

100% correct. Please also deploy {{paid}} on your user page. Wikipedia might have documented it more clearly, but life was ever thus. Thank you for attending to this. Fiddle Faddle 13:33, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: BlueSky Statistics (January 23)[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 Timtrent was:

The fundamental issue is referencing, so I am pushing it back to you for attention in that area.

We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, and in WP:RS please. See WP:42. 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 referred to, 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 topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

As you will see, several of the references are to Primary 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:BlueSky Statistics 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:BlueSky Statistics, 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.

Fiddle Faddle 13:36, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing to despair about here. What we always look for is excellent referencing. My declining the (any) draft is blind to whether an editor has a COI or is not associated with the draft. That is how we improve Wikipedia. Your search, now, should be for references that meet the very tough criteria. Find them and the draft is highly likely to be accepted. Our criteria are that any draft requires a 60% or better chance of survival of a deletion process once acceoted. Currently, were it to be accepted, it would fail.

Reviews are an iterative process, not unlike software development Fiddle Faddle 13:44, 23 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback, it has been really helpful. I'll search for other sources. I don't think they exist at the moment, but they will eventually. Bob.Muenchen Bob.Muenchen (talk) 12:20, 24 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest[edit]

Please have a look at WP:COI. You should not be writing about yourself or your work on Wikipedia, and you definitely should not be inserting links to your websites. MrOllie (talk) 13:37, 25 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]