User talk:Lrehage
Earl Beutler moved to draftspace[edit]
It appears that you may have a conflict of interest with the subject of Earl Beutler, and as such you should submit this article to be published through the Articles for Creation process. Before editing the article further, please first disclose on your user page and on the article's Talk page whether you have received money to write this or other articles on Wikipedia, or if you have any other kind of conflict of interest concerning the subject. I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of "Draft:" before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. Before submitting, you should make sure that the article is fully compliant with Wikipedia’s neutrality and verifiability policies, as well as our notability guidelines. When you’re ready, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page. This process is encouraged, but optional. If you choose not to participate in it, you can remove the AfC template and move the article back to mainspace. You should also consider reaching out to the Teahouse for additional feedback and aid from experienced editors. signed, Rosguill talk 23:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)
- I have never received money or any form of compensation for writing or editing this or any other articles on Wikipedia. I believe this meets both the neutrality and verifiability policies as well as the notability guidelines Lrehage (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Can you clarify whether you have any personal relation to or contact with Earl Beutler? The draft continues to have neutrality issues, particularly through the use of promotional language not adequately cited to independent sources. The unreferenced claims in the article further are suggestive of original research via a personal knowledge of Beutler's accomplishments, which is not an adequate basis for the content of a Wikipedia article. I have not assessed the subject for overall notability, but that is another standard that you should ensure the article meets before resubmitting it. signed, Rosguill talk 15:55, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Yes, I have known him professionally. I'm not sure what "promotional language" you are referring to. My attempt was simply to be factual about an important figure in the evolution of scientific/academic software. It is true that some of the history is not documented anywhere (because it pre-dates the internet), but it is partly for that reason that it seems important to document now. Lrehage (talk) 19:57, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Knowing him professionally would comprise a conflict of interest that should be disclosed on both your user page and on the affected article's talk page per the instructions at WP:COI before the article is resubmitted. Information that cannot be cited to published reliable sources should be removed from the article, as Wikipedia is not a publisher of original research; if you believe there is a need to document such information, I would recommend that you try to publish the material elsewhere. Regarding promotional content, phrases like
...included the unique feature of not allowing any data to be deleted. These functions help ensure data integrity which has been a growing problem in science.
;which was more powerful and far less expensive than competitors
; etc. are not appropriate to include in an article unless supported by secondary sources that explicitly assert these various claims. Additionally, phrases such asOver 1,000 colleges and universities around the world...
smack of ad-copy and should be avoided, even if technically accurate. signed, Rosguill talk 20:14, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Knowing him professionally would comprise a conflict of interest that should be disclosed on both your user page and on the affected article's talk page per the instructions at WP:COI before the article is resubmitted. Information that cannot be cited to published reliable sources should be removed from the article, as Wikipedia is not a publisher of original research; if you believe there is a need to document such information, I would recommend that you try to publish the material elsewhere. Regarding promotional content, phrases like
- Yes, I have known him professionally. I'm not sure what "promotional language" you are referring to. My attempt was simply to be factual about an important figure in the evolution of scientific/academic software. It is true that some of the history is not documented anywhere (because it pre-dates the internet), but it is partly for that reason that it seems important to document now. Lrehage (talk) 19:57, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
- Can you clarify whether you have any personal relation to or contact with Earl Beutler? The draft continues to have neutrality issues, particularly through the use of promotional language not adequately cited to independent sources. The unreferenced claims in the article further are suggestive of original research via a personal knowledge of Beutler's accomplishments, which is not an adequate basis for the content of a Wikipedia article. I have not assessed the subject for overall notability, but that is another standard that you should ensure the article meets before resubmitting it. signed, Rosguill talk 15:55, 27 October 2022 (UTC)
Your draft article, Draft:Earl Beutler[edit]
Hello, Lrehage. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Earl Beutler".
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. 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.
Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. ✗plicit 00:09, 26 April 2023 (UTC)