User talk:Drm310

Volunteer program

Hello! This is a wikimedia account run by volunteers for Red Hen Press. I'm unsure how to address this concern, as 1. this is the first I've heard of it (sorry about that!), and 2. This is a volunteer-based situation. My intention is to fill in missing factual information about authors, as seems necessary. How do you recommend I address this? There is no user page for this account yet. Thank you for your help! Rhpwikichicken (talk) 19:54, 30 July 2019 (UTC)Rhpwikichicken, 7.30.19

@Rhpwikichicken: How many volunteers have had access to this account since it was created? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:56, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

I can't be certain because it has been inactive for a few years, but I'd guess 1 or 2 before me. Rhpwikichicken (talk) 20:01, 30 July 2019 (UTC)Rhpwikichicken, 7.30.19

@Rhpwikichicken: I'm afraid to inform you that sharing an account was always a violation of Wikipedia's username policy. It was wrong of your predecessor(s) to have ever passed access to this account on to others. Only one person - the same person - may use an account for its entire lifetime. Everyone who edits Wikipedia must operate their own individual account.

I have no choice but to report this to administrators; your account may be blocked from editing as a result. If it does, create a new account that only you have access to. If the administrator simply instructs you to change your password, then do so.

Regardless of the outcome, please familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's rules about conflict of interest before making any more edits:

• Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations
• Wikipedia:Conflict of interest
• Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide

We highly discourage editors with a conflict of interest from directly editing topics relating to their organizations. It is better that you request edits on the article talk pages instead. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:14, 30 July 2019 (UTC)

Help me! about Bismillah Group pages

Hello, I'm En HaRry @Drm310: Drm310 Dear Sir, Please note that the above information’s are used from the company website Bismillah Group, Bismillah Towels Group LTD. and I’m the authorized person on behalf of the company to edit any update relating to the company Bismillah Group , Bismillah Towels Group LTD.
For avoiding direct infringement, I would like to use the information’s providing the relevant links in the footnote. Please let me know whether it would be fine or not.

Thanks and Regards En HaRry 13:20, 5 August, 2019. (GMT+6)

@HaRry2MaC: If you are working on behalf of the company to edit the article(s) about them in Wikipedia, there are a number of things you need to know.

1. If they are paying you for your work, either directly or an agency that employs you, then you must follow Wikipedia's mandatory and non-negotiable paid editing disclosure policy. You must state what articles you are being paid to edit, and who it paying you.
2. Because you are representing the company's interests, you have a conflict of interest (COI). While COI editing is not prohibited, it is highly discouraged because of the inherent difficulty you will have adhering to the required neutral point of view.
3. The company has no right of ownership or editorial control over the article(s) about it. Wikipedia has little interest in what a company wants to say about itself, and no interest whatsoever in how it wants to be portrayed. Disagreements over content should be discussed on the article talk page.
4. The text you posted was copied directly from the company website. You cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia, even if you are the copyright holder or have the copyright holder's permission. In short, a copyright owner cannot offer Wikipedia a one-time license for use. Rather, the copyright to the material has to be released – permanently and irrevocably – into the public domain or under a free copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia's licenses. This is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, so all content must be licensed for that purpose. You can learn more about this policy at Wikipedia:Copyrights.
5. Article content must be cited to sources that are both reliable and independent of the article subject. This means Wikipedia heavily favours mainstream academic and journalistic sources. Primary sources like a company website can verify basic facts and figures, but not interpretations of those facts. Company-authored materials like press releases, social media posts and other self-published sources will not be accepted as sources.
6. After making the appropriate disclosures of your relationship to this company, you should not edit the articles directly. Rather, you should suggest changes on the article talk page with the {{request edit}} template. This will get the attention of other uninvolved editors to review your changes and offer revisions.

--Drm310 🍁 (talk) 23:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you!

Hello, Drm310,

I keep going to editor's talk pages to post a note about creating autobiographies only to find you've already done it! Thank you for your work communicating with new editors and letting them know about Wikipedia's standards of notability. It's appreciated. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 01:56, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

You're welcome, Liz! I do what I can. :-) I appreciate the acknowledgement. Cheers! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 02:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)

Please verify my page "Visual-CFD"

Hello, Drm310,

Thank you for spending time to review my page. I have been editing the page since long time and have reduced its content by 90%. Please review it and publish my page, also suggest if still need changes. If required please message me on "srp.patil@hotmail.com".

Regards,

Srp1220

@Srp1220: I will not discuss the article in private over email. Whatever you need can be discussed publicly on talk pages.

You've already received replies to your posting on the Teahouse, so there's not much more I can add. All the references you provided are for the software developer or its community of users. This isn't good enough. You need to show that this product has received significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the software developer.

You identified that you are an employee of the software developer, so that makes you must follow Wikipedia's mandatory and non-negotiable paid editing disclosure policy. Do not make any further edits until you have made the required disclosures. Also review Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, as they very much apply to you. Wikipedia is not a space to advertise or promote... we have no interest in what your company wants to say about your product(s). --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)

Re: Editing done in the page Internet Of Things

Hi, I have edited the page Internet of Things again with citations, do check and let me know it it is reliable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mahendrasalvi (talk • contribs) 07:28, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

@Mahendrasalvi: No, I am sorry but blogs are by definition self-published sources and therefore unreliable. Another editor has already reverted your additions.

Reliable sources are defined as sources that have an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. This heavily favours mainstream news, peer-reviewed academic and respected trade publications. Blogs, social media and other self-published sources will not be considered reliable. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 07:59, 24 August 2019 (UTC)

Quick question about talk page notices

Howdy! I've noticed you placing warnings on talk pages to the effect of "Your user page doesn't meet guidelines, here's the list of things a user page shouldn't be" and "this is your talk page, not a place to draft, etc." I was wondering if those are templated warnings, and if so, what the templates are - I've looked for templates for those notices but haven't found any. Cheers! ^creffpublic _{a creffett franchise} (talk to the boss) 16:50, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Creffpublic. I haven't had the motivation to learn how to make templates out of them, so for now I just keep them stashed away in subpages:

• User:Drm310/Userpage
• User:Drm310/Notyou

They were based on messages I'd seen used by Anna Frodesiak and JohnCD (RIP). Naturally, you're welcome to copy and adapt them if you like! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:56, 26 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I've thrown one together at {{Uw-usertalk}}, since that one in particular is one I feel like I could use a lot. creffett (talk) 00:53, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Oh, nice! I forgot about that one. My original is at User:Drm310/Usertalk but you might have found it already. :-) --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:09, 27 August 2019 (UTC)

Re: Notice of discretionary sanctions regarding blockchain and cryptocurrencies

Hi, Thank you for reviewing this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Opportunities_in_Blockchain_Research Will you be able to explain in simple words what is needed to remove the sanctions? Violeta At TheBlockchainHub (talk) 02:23, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

@Violeta At TheBlockchainHub: I think you have misunderstood the notice I left on your talk page. You have not done anything wrong, and there are no sanctions being applied to your particular draft article.

The notice I left was preemptory general information. It is to inform you that as of 2018, the Wikipedia editing community had to implement special measures regarding all blockchain and cryptocurrency topics. This was done in response to a rash of blatant promotional contributions, claims of ownership over article content, use of unreliable "trade press" sources, and conflicts of interest.

It is now our practice to inform editors about the existence of these measures whenever we notice they write about these topics. It is hoped that by doing so, we educate editors and prevent the types of problems that had been seen from reoccurring.

Your draft article has not been submitted for review. When you have finished editing it and feel ready to submit it for review, you can do so using the Submit button near the top of the draft article. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 04:54, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

OeKB CSD

Dear Drm310, you marked my article with disclosure of employment. May I draw your attention to the following articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clearstream https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Euroclear

Clearstream is the German and Luxembourg CSD, Euroclear is the Belgian CSD and OeKB CSD is the Austrian CSD. The Central Securities Depository Regulation (reference 1 in my article) says that every CSD in a country has to apply for a certification. After the approvement of each Authority (in Austria it is the Financial Market Authority (FMA)), the company can act as the CSD of the country. The scope of OeKB CSD in my article is similar to the scope of Clearstram and Euroclear. Are this articles marked with disclosure? Therefore, this is no advertisement, the article describes only the tasks of the Austrian CSD, not more and not less. So please have a look at it again - if you want to change something, I am open for any discussion, but please do not mark it for disclosure.

Thx a lot! Kind regards, Jelena — Preceding unsigned comment added by JelenaIlicVienna (talk • contribs) 09:26, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

FWIW, I've posted guidance on her talk page Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:27, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@JelenaIlicVienna: Wikipedia's paid editing disclosure policy took effect in June 2014. As of then, any contributor who is creating or editing articles in exchange for compensation must disclose this information. Since you appear to be associated with this organization, compliance with this policy is mandatory if you intend to write about it.

Jimfbleak has given you plenty of good advice on your talk page, so I won't repeat it here. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:36, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

Hello & let's collaborate!

Hello Drm, Thanks for you advice concerning my edits, have been rolled back as you can see. You suggested me to read about conflicts terms, which I have already (it's written on my page etc.). It is something I do as an update (if you read the old version, it used to stop at 2016, and even before, on many aspects and was much more promotional for no reason). You are right in that I didn't know about such rules. If i got it right I need to ask someone from the list you sent me to make a draft of my version, for you can't, right? I would be glad to work this page along with you and explain the changes if need be. My objective is clearly to update this page in an objective way, I won't sell here. Thanks! --Bricegrenon (talk) 19:11, 11 September 2019 (UTC)do not hesitate to reach me

@Bricegrenon: Our usual advice is to leave a message with your suggested revisions on the article talk page (Talk:AT Internet) using the {{request edit}} template. The template will make an entry in a queue of requested edits for uninvolved editors to review and comment on. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:39, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bricegrenon: I would also suggest you do the same on French Wikipedia, as I see that you've contributed to fr:AT Internet. Unfortunately there is no equivalent to the request edit template on English Wikipedia. I looked for something like fr:Modèle:Demande de modification but it doesn't exist. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:47, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Drm310: As you can see on the talk page, previous messages have been posted without any follow. I will sure follow the best process and discuss of possible improvements. Do I need to ask an admin for the french one then? Are you out to work on it or not? I definitely need a helping hand. Cheers! --Bricegrenon (talk) 23:29, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Bricegrenon: I can ask one or two users that I've talked with on fr-wiki to see if there's a similar way to solicit third-party reviews of suggested content. It's unfortunate that the previous talk page entries went unnoticed or unreplied. French isn't my first language, but I think I can get by with my intermediate knowledge plus a bit of help from Google Translate! --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 22:17, 11 September 2019 (UTC)

@Drm310: Sure it would be very useful! Either french or english, at least i will be sure to have an objective basis. --Bricegrenon (talk) 21:41, 12 September 2019 (UTC)

New Page Review newsletter September-October 2019

Hello Drm310,

Backlog

Instead of reaching a magic 300 as it once did last year, the backlog approaching 6,000 is still far too high. An effort is also needed to ensure that older unsuitable older pages at the back of the queue do not get automatically indexed for Google.

Coordinator

A proposal is taking place here to confirm a nominated user as Coordinator of NPR.

This month's refresher course

Why I Hate Speedy Deleters, a 2008 essay by long since retired Ballonman, is still as valid today. Those of us who patrol large numbers of new pages can be forgiven for making the occasional mistake while others can learn from their 'beginner' errors. Worth reading.

Deletion tags

Do bear in mind that articles in the feed showing the trash can icon (you will need to have 'Nominated for deletion' enabled for this in your filters) may have been tagged by inexperienced or non NPR rights holders using Twinkle. They require your further verification.

Paid editing

Please be sure to look for the tell-tale signs of undisclosed paid editing. Contact the creator if appropriate, and submit the issue to WP:COIN if necessary. WMF policy requires paid editors to connect to their adverts.

Subject-specific notability guidelines' (SNG). Alternatives to deletion

• Reviewers are requested to familiarise themselves once more with notability guidelines for organisations and companies.
• Blank-and-Redirect is a solution anchored in policy. Please consider this alternative before PRODing or CSD. Note however, that users will often revert or usurp redirects to re-create deleted articles. Do regularly patrol the redirects in the feed.

Not English

• A common issue: Pages not in English or poor, unattributed machine translations should not reside in main space even if they are stubs. Please ensure you are familiar with WP:NPPNE. Check in Google for the language and content, and if they do have potential, tag as required, then move to draft. Modify the text of the template as appropriate before sending it.

Tools

Regular reviewers will appreciate the most recent enhancements to the New Pages Feed and features in the Curation tool, and there are still more to come. Due to the wealth of information now displayed by ORES, reviewers are strongly encouraged to use the system now rather than Twinkle; it will also correctly populate the logs.

Stub sorting, by SD0001: A new script is available for adding/removing stub tags. See User:SD0001/StubSorter.js, It features a simple HotCat-style dynamic search field. Many of the reviewers who are using it are finding it an improvement upon other available tools.

Assessment: The script at User:Evad37/rater makes the addition of Wikiproject templates extremely easy. New page creators rarely do this. Reviewers are not obliged to make these edits but they only take a few seconds. They can use the Curation message system to let the creator know what they have done.

DannyS712 bot III is now patrolling certain categories of uncontroversial redirects. Curious? Check out its patrol log.

Go here to remove your name if you wish to opt-out of future mailings.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:15, 11 September 2019 (UTC)