User talk:Leoleovich

This is Leoleovich's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Simple Precision Time Protocol (November 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WikiOriginal-9 was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

There is not enough independent, significant coverage listed as to why this topic is notable enough for a Wikipedia article.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Simple Precision Time Protocol and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 17:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Leoleovich! Having an article draft 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! WikiOriginal-9 (talk) 17:44, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Time Card (Hardware) (November 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Vanderwaalforces was:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Time Card (Hardware) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

Vanderwaalforces (talk) 23:29, 13 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Time Card (Hardware) (November 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by S0091 were:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just passing mentions about the subject)
reliable
secondary
independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet these criteria before resubmitting. 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:

Most of the sources are not reliable (github, git.kernal, social media, blogs, etc.) and most of the content is unsourced.

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 after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Time Card (Hardware) and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 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.

S0091 (talk) 14:14, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Time Card (Hardware) (November 14)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by S0091 was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Meta is not an independent source for their own software.

S0091 (talk) 19:54, 14 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

November 2023

Hello Leoleovich. 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 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 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:Leoleovich. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Leoleovich|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. S0091 (talk) 15:24, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Leoleovich, you can disregard the "do not edit further" instruction as you have at least declared a COI and you you are following the proper protocol by submitting drafts, but I wonder if you actually fall under WP:PAID which is a different disclosure (i.e. you are employed by those affiliated). If so, please make the appropriate update to your User page. S0091 (talk) 15:45, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 as per your advice I added "paid" COI as I am a Meta employee, although I am working in engineering (editing wikipedia is not part of my job). Leoleovich (talk) 15:55, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect! I also left a notice for Ahmadexp and I just pinged you at their talk page because it was unclear who had which affiliation but this clarifies. Its always best to error on the side of transparency here. S0091 (talk) 16:10, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your guidance so far. Let's continue conversation regarding the content in help desk. Appreciate you spending time on this. Leoleovich (talk) 16:14, 15 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at Open Time Card, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.

DO NOT circumvent Wikipedia's processes for your own aims. I have moved Open Time Card to draft space and redirected it Draft:Time Card (Hardware). I also have reverted your changes to Open Compute Project as you should not be editing the article directly, rather as instructed, making edit requests. Any good faith you had gained is now lost. S0091 (talk) 17:03, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@S0091 I genuinely don't bias toward publishing this page. We keep asking for assistance but get threats instead?

Based on our previous discussion we added different COI, deleted redundant information (and clarified some points you raised), we updated the references (added dates). I added some links not to "promote" (nothing to promote, we are not selling anything). You simply removed hours on my work :(

What could we do to get help? Could you please pull somebody else in this discussion?

Thank you. Leoleovich (talk) 17:13, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promotion/advocacy of any kind is not allowed and is much broader than just trying to sell something (read WP:NOTPROMO which is a core Wikipedia policy). Your work is still available at Draft:Time Card (Hardware) so nothing has been wasted. However, as has been explained to you several times, (three reviews by different editors and another reviewer at the helpdesk piped in, so four different editors) the current sources are not sufficient to meet the notability criteria. Because you did not like/understand the reasoning, you violated Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and created the article in mainspace. Yes, that kind of behaviour warrants a stern warning and editors are blocked routinely for doing what you did. S0091 (talk) 17:57, 17 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Simple Precision Time Protocol

Hello, Leoleovich. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Simple Precision Time Protocol, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:05, 9 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]