User talk:Pndt

June 2022

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. [1] MrOllie (talk) 19:31, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Hello Pndt. 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:Pndt. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Pndt|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. MrOllie (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Data Quality Management System

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Data Quality Management System, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. MrOllie (talk) 19:32, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

I noticed your comment on the talk page. Wikipedia should not be used to promote anyone or anything. That's often misunderstood to mean only for-profit entities, but anything, including charities, causes, concepts, people, etc., can be promoted, and none of that is allowed here even if the endeavor is not for profit. Wikipedia articles should be about subjects for which a substantial quantity of reliable and independent material is already available, not to push anything novel. So at this time, it would seem that subject is not an appropriate one for an article, regardless of how one might write one. If you would like to "get the word out" about a concept your organization has come up with, please use a venue such as your organization's website or social media, not Wikipedia. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 23:51, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Dear administrator,

In this line of thought, all articles on ISO standards (ISO 9001, etc.) should be removed. They are certainly not impartial and promote information products that make a lot of money for the publisher of the standard.

However, what worries me the most, is that the administrator in my case comes to a judgement based on 'impressions'. That should not be the case. There should be an objective judgement based on Wikipedia's criteria.

I am therefore still surprised that my article was deleted. I would like to know what has to be changed in order to get it published. It can't be the subject matter.

The way things are going is very unsatisfactory to me, also because so little advise is givven.

Wikipedia aims to be a fast (wiki). In this way, it is delaying the introduction of new concepts.

I also notice how vague the term promotional is. It should be better defined.

I would also like to receive the article back, so that I can publish it in a different form.

However, I would prefer it if it were published after any adjustments have been made.

Pndt (talk) 11:15, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

ISO 9001 has a great deal of secondary source material about it. Your organization's standard does not. That actually matters. The answer is "no", and will remain "no" regardless how many times you ask the question. The subject you propose is not suitable for an article here. Period. Don't attempt to promote it here again. If you would like to "spread the word" about it, use your organization's website or social media, but do not attempt to do that here. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:03, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Is the article still available? I put a lot of work in it. I would be nice as I can get it back in one way or another.Administrators can search for partial titles at Special:Undelete. Pndt (talk) 13:25, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

If you will agree not to attempt to put it back into mainspace here again, but would like to use it elsewhere, I would be willing to provide a temporary copy in your userspace. Would that work? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 16:17, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Thank would be good. I want to copy it for my own purpose. Pndt (talk) 16:19, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

I've placed it at User:Pndt/Data Quality Management System. Once you've gotten it copied, you can place the tag {{db-u1}} on it to have it deleted from userspace. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 22:32, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

Progress in the field of data quality

My suggestion is to add the following phrase to the chapter about data quality dimensions:

In a later study, sixty dimensions of data quality were inventoried, comparing definitions from different sources. In this study, the definitions were formulated so that they comply with the ISO 704 standard. The result is a list of 60 standardised definitions of dimensions of data quality. Also added to each dimension is which data concept the dimension belongs to. This way, a distinction can be made, for instance, between the completeness of values, the completeness or records and the completeness of attributes. https://www.dama-nl.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/DDQ-Dimensions-of-Data-Quality-Research-Paper-version-1.2-d.d.-3-Sept-2020.pdf Pndt (talk) 20:03, 7 October 2022 (UTC)