User talk:Georgmichaels

Deletion discussion about National Institute for Digital Security

Hello, Georgmichaels, and welcome to Wikipedia. I edit here too, under the username Atsme, and I thank you for your contributions.

I wanted to let you know, however, that I've started a discussion about whether an article that you created, National Institute for Digital Security, should be deleted, as I am not sure that it is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia in its current form. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Institute for Digital Security.

You might like to note that such discussions usually run for seven days and are not ballot-polls. And, our guide about effectively contributing to such discussions is worth a read. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.

If you have any questions, please leave a comment here and prepend it with {{Re|Atsme}}. And, don't forget to sign your reply with ~~~~ . Thanks!

(Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Atsme 💬 📧 13:11, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Peter Wilfahrt for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Peter Wilfahrt is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Peter Wilfahrt until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

SailingInABathTub (talk) 17:54, 2 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of National Institute for Digital Security for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article National Institute for Digital Security, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Institute for Digital Security until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Hello Georgmichaels. The nature of your edits 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:Georgmichaels. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Georgmichaels|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. Daiyusha (talk) 11:24, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Daiyusha: Yes, reading through my edit history it really looks like this. Yes, I've edited pages for my previous employer, but the new edits (esp. for Peter Wilfahrt and the NIDS) haven't been incentivized by any kind. I have not been compensated or otherwise privileged for my edits. Georgmichaels (talk) 11:57, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for confirming. Daiyusha (talk) 12:31, 3 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]