User talk:PhilS223: Difference between revisions

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

PhilS223, good luck, and have fun. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 21:52, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

How to write articles that won't be rejected

{{sup|(Part of a larger guide covering issues new users face):

If you're going to write an article about anyone or anything that is not you or something you are connected to, here are the steps you should follow:

1) Choose a topic whose notability is attested by discussions of it in several reliable independent sources.

2) Gather as many professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources you can find. Google Books is a good resource for this. Also, while search engine results are not sources, they are where you can find sources. Just remember that they need to be professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources.

3) Focus on just the ones that are not dependent upon or affiliated with the subject, but still specifically about the subject and providing in-depth coverage (not passing mentions). If you do not have at least three such sources, the subject is not yet notable and trying to write an article at this point will only fail.

4) Summarize those sources left after step 3, adding citations at the end of them. You'll want to do this in a program with little/no formatting, like Microsoft Notepad or Notepad++, and not in something like Microsoft Word or LibreOffice Writer. Make sure this summary is just bare statement of facts, phrased in a way that even someone who hates the subject can agree with.

5) Combine overlapping summaries where possible (without arriving at new statements that no individual source supports), repeating citations as needed.

6) Paraphrase the whole thing just to be extra sure you've avoided any copyright violations or plagiarism.

7) Use the Article wizard to post this draft and wait for approval.

8) Expand the article using sources you put aside in step 3 (but make sure they don't make up more than half the sources for the article, and make sure that affiliated sources don't make up more than half of that).

Doing something besides those steps typically results in the article not being approved, or even in its deletion.

If you are writing about yourself, or someone or something you are connected with (such as a friend, family member, or your business), the following steps are different:

0) If the subject really was notable, you wouldn't need to write the article. Remember that articles are owned by the Wikipedia community as a whole, not the article subject or the article author. If you do not want other people to write about you, then starting an article about yourself is a bad idea.

8a) If the article is accepted, never edit it again. Instead, make edit requests on the article's talk page.

8b) If the article is rejected, there will be a reason given. Read it carefully and closely. If there are links in the reason, open them and read those pages.

Ian.thomson (talk) 21:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much Ian.thomson! The draft I submitted is about me so I guess I cannot edit it? PhilS223 (talk) 21:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Once it's approved, you should not edit it. If it's not approved, I'd recommend starting over and following these instructions exactly. The goal is to have a summary of three or more reliable sources that are specifically and primarily about you but completely independent of you -- nothing else to distract from the proof of notability. Other sources (ones that are primarily about other stuff, ones connected to you) can be added via edit request after it's approved. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:00, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you again for the kind explanation. I am really grateful for the help I have received so far.

Re: Draft:Phil Sokowicz

connection

With some reading, I understand that "JaaS" and "a legal tech company" are nearly the same concept, i.e. one runs the other. In the article text this is not clear. (To reply, click 'edit', and add your message at the end of the section.) --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

photo

Do you have a photo of yourself that you took? This can be added to the article. --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ISM language note

The article de:International School of Management (ISM) has no English version. In the article, could you add "(in German)" after the link to the German Wikipedia page? --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ISM translation

Would you like to create the English page for ISM? It does not have to be long, just two or three most important paragraphs would suffice. --Gryllida (talk) 22:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Gryllida, thank you very much for your kind explanations. I would really love to create the English page for ISM. I studied there so I am not sure if I can write for it. Could you be kind enough to help me with my page? Thanks, Phil

Your submission at Articles for creation: Phil Sokowicz (April 27)

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'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 people). 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Phil Sokowicz 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:Phil Sokowicz, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, PhilS223! 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notability

You are probably not notable by our peculiar definition of notability. If you are not notable, there is nothing you can do on-wiki to keep us from deleting the article. Please see WP:AMOUNT. But maybe I'm wrong! If so, you can ensure that we keep the article by finding appropriate references. This is easy to mess up, so take a look at Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). -Arch dude (talk) 04:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Arch dude, thank you for the message. I do have some sources like this- https://www.theselfemployed.com/article/phil-sokowicz-educating-people-about-the-life-insurance-loophole/ mentioning me as per requirement of Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). Do you think this would help? Thanks, Phil

Revision as of 14:19, 27 April 2020 edit PhilS223 (talk \| contribs) 28 edits →Re: Draft:Phil Sokowicz ← Previous edit		Revision as of 14:21, 27 April 2020 edit undo PhilS223 (talk \| contribs) 28 edits →Notability Next edit →
Line 120:		Line 120:

	You are probably not notable by our peculiar definition of notability. If you are not notable, there is nothing you can do on-wiki to keep us from deleting the article. Please see [[WP:AMOUNT]]. But maybe I'm wrong! If so, you can ensure that we keep the article by finding appropriate references. This is easy to mess up, so take a look at [[Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability)]]. -[[User:Arch dude\|Arch dude]] ([[User talk:Arch dude\|talk]]) 04:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)		You are probably not notable by our peculiar definition of notability. If you are not notable, there is nothing you can do on-wiki to keep us from deleting the article. Please see [[WP:AMOUNT]]. But maybe I'm wrong! If so, you can ensure that we keep the article by finding appropriate references. This is easy to mess up, so take a look at [[Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability)]]. -[[User:Arch dude\|Arch dude]] ([[User talk:Arch dude\|talk]]) 04:14, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

			Dear [[User:Arch dude\|Arch dude]], thank you for the message. I do have some sources like this- https://www.theselfemployed.com/article/phil-sokowicz-educating-people-about-the-life-insurance-loophole/ mentioning me as per requirement of [[Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability)]]. Do you think this would help? Thanks, Phil