User talk:Samh100

AfC notification: Draft:(huupe) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:(huupe). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 05:20, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

November 2023

Hello Samh100. 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:Samh100. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Samh100|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. 331dot (talk) 10:03, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I have note been paid to for these edits. Samh100 (talk) 15:06, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Samh100 you have declared you have a personal or professional connection to (huupe). What is that connection? Qcne (talk) 15:23, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I have disclosed that I am an employee on the talk page as requested. Is there somewhere else I should have this on? Please inform if there is a preferred place to list. Samh100 (talk) 15:38, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

If you're an employee then you are being paid to write about (huupe), as you are not writing it out of the goodness of your own heart. Please make the Paid editing disclosure as instructed to above. Qcne (talk) 15:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes! Thank you. I have done that. Can you see it? Samh100 (talk) 16:00, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Have fixed the code and added it to your User Page too. Thank you. Qcne (talk) 16:02, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Perfect! Should I resubmit or whatis the correct process to proceed? Samh100 (talk) 16:03, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Lastly, could the parentheses be removed. I just want to make sure the "h" is lower case for proper title? Samh100 (talk) 16:04, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

So, if you're talking about Draft:(huupe) then it's not ready to be re-submitted for review for the reasons outlined in my reply below. It genuinely needs a complete re-write from scratch as it is just a marketing piece at the moment, which is strictly prohibited on Wikipedia.

I have just added a comment to the draft about the article title however. Qcne (talk) 16:08, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for changing the article title. Can you explain which marketing aspect would be prohibited; I just want to make sure to fix it when it is resubmitted. Is there any way to know how long it would take to be reviewed again for approval? Samh100 (talk) 16:11, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

@Samh100 I will quickly go through and point out problematic language:

- world's first smart basketball hoop (who says it is the world's first?)

- that allows you to train like a pro (prohibited second-person voice)

- with a high-quality tempered glass backboard (who says it is high quality)

- The product’s robust software allows for an intuitive user interface for easy navigation of the vast array of training, gaming and streaming options available (this is full of WP:PEACOCK language)

- huupe is a revolutionary (who says it is revolutionary)

- life-long friends (Wikipedia does not care about the personal relationships of founders)

- The idea for huupe was born then (too casual)

- performance metrics was groundbreaking (who said it was groundbreaking)

- and it was clear that huupe had the potential to change the way people (clear from who? who said it would change the way people train?)

- overwhelming success (too casual)

- They have quickly gained tons of praise on social media (too casual, and without actual metrics this is a useless addition)

- Today, the huupe is used by players of all ages and skill levels (Wikipedia articles do not refer to the present day, and this is too casual)

- The products are constantly improving, with new features being added almost weekly (blatant marketing speak)

- Anton and Saeed are poised to revolutionize the basketball industry while making the game more accessible and enjoyable for everyone (blatant marketing)

Like I said, this needs a re-write from scratch. It is clear that you have gone into writing this with the purpose of promoting the huupe and using Wikipedia to advertise the product: this is prohibited. See WP:SPAM. Qcne (talk) 16:19, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that. The only thing I would question is that this is truly the world's first smart basketball hoop. There was a source attached to that. It is not marketing, but a fact. Can that stay because of the fact that it is? Samh100 (talk) 16:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

The source seems to be the huupe website itself? You can't source your own organisation to promote products for hopefully obvious reasons. If there was a completely independent source that described huupe as the "world's first smart basketball hoop" (a newspaper article, not sponsored by the company would work), then you could have a phrase like "Huupe has been described by [newspaper] as "the world's first smart basketball hoop". Statements that have a hint of assertation about them must be sourced by independent sources and made clear it is not coming from Wikipedia's voice. Qcne (talk) 16:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I have many different sources attached to this article with them saying it. Should I just change the source attached to the statement?

One other issue I was having was uploading images that were our own, but Wikipedia stated it wasn't even though I took the pictures. Do you any advice for that?

Lastly, how long would the process for approval take? Samh100 (talk) 16:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

- When you make an assertation like "world's first" the source should be directly after the statement as an in-line citation. See the tutorial at WP:INTREFVE. That is so readers can specifically know where the statement has come from. Sources can be re-used multiple times throughout the body of the text to cite different statements.

- Images are tricky as they must be free use or your own work. If you are using Wikipedia to upload images, see Wikipedia:Image use policy. If you are using Wikimedia Commons see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Licensing. In any case images are not used to judge the quality of a draft so at this stage I would focus on the text.

- Articles in the queue are reviewed in no particular order, it may take weeks. Qcne (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Regarding images. They are our own work. We have said that when submitting. It still doesn't let us. Is there any note to make on that?

For these edits, I can just use the same page I am on for resubmission. I want to make sure I understand this properly. Samh100 (talk) 16:45, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

- I've had a look on both Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons for any images uploaded by you but can't find any, were they deleted? If they are your own work and you properly declare that then it shouldn't be a problem, but to be honest I am not the expert on images and you may have better luck asking at WP:HELPDESK or WP:TEAHOUSE, or https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Help_desk.

- Yep, please edit the same draft at Draft:(huupe) Qcne (talk) 16:50, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

That is odd. Thank you for this information. Can either the HELPDESK or TEAHOUSE submit on my behalf? Samh100 (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

No, but they can advise on the proper process. I specifically deal with article drafts, not images, so don't have experience in that area unfortunately. Qcne (talk) 16:53, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Great! I have just fixed the changes that you requested. Should I submit for approval? Samh100 (talk) 17:13, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Did you press Publish, which saves your changes? As currently I can't see any changes. Qcne (talk) 17:28, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I have just hit it. Thank you. Please let me know if there is anything else that I can answer. Samh100 (talk) 17:31, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: (huupe) (December 20)

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

Qcne (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for the quick review. Please note I have disclosed that I am an employee for this company, but everything stated is factual and does not come from a bias. This article does come from a neutral point of view and only states true facts that have been stated about the company with sources that comply. Can you please explain how this can be improved? Samh100 (talk) 15:25, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Samh100, I've replied above about the paid editing disclosure. The draft you wrote was straight out of a PR advertising piece and not at all appropriate for Wikipedia. I imagine perhaps you have a marketing background?

Wikipedia articles are written in a dry, factual voice, with no reference to the reader. The content should purely summarise or paraphrase what reliable sources state and must not make any assertations.

I really can't give you advice on improving the draft as it needs a complete re-write from scratch. I'd recommend you have a look at any article that has been rated WP:GOOD and try and emulate the style.

Let me know if you have any questions, Qcne (talk) 15:59, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I have made the changes to be dry and factual and hit publish. Can you please see the changes and let me know what you think? Samh100 (talk) 23:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I have disclosed that I am an employee on the talk page as requested. Is there somewhere else I should have this on? Samh100 (talk) 15:26, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Samh100! 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! Qcne (talk) 15:20, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:(huupe) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:(huupe). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 16:56, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I have made the proper edits. Can you please let me know what you think? Samh100 (talk) 23:41, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: (huupe) (December 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Theroadislong were:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:(huupe) 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 19:39, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Thank you for reviewing this. The article does seem unbias although I am an employee (which I stated). Can you please inform me of the other issues that you believe that I should fix? Samh100 (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:(huupe) has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:(huupe). Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 20:17, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: (huupe) (December 22)

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

Lewcm Talk to me! 12:42, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for looking over the piece. I want to make sure this is not an advertisement as these are unbiased facts from a neutral point of view. What do I need to remove or fix? Samh100 (talk) 12:48, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

I fear that you are too close to your company/this product to be able to write about it as Wikipedia requires. My advice is that you abandon this effort, but if you want to proceed, you will essentially need to start over writing in a dry, matter of fact way with no embellishments or marketing speak, summarizing the significant coverage of your product in independent reliable sources. I get that your company considers its product to be significant and revolutionary, and it may even be so, but Wikipedia wants to know if others consider it so and why.

The media section as is now is useless- we don't need a summary of publications that mention your product, nor do routine business activities like the raising of funds need to be mentioned. 331dot (talk) 13:46, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@331dot Thank you for the message. I have removed the Media Praise Section entirely. I am trying to understand from your view to improve the piece. There is no other marketing talk that I see. Can you clarify if there is any other? Samh100 (talk) 14:01, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

The first section is promotional, especially the first line. You're trying to describe your product and talk it up. Every company thinks that its products are new and revolutionary; if this product is the first of its type, we need to know who says so- your company saying so is insufficient("Huupe is a smart basketball hoop. It is said by XYZ Source to be the first product of its type"). 331dot (talk) 14:06, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that. The company is very serious that this is the world's first smart basketball hoop. The source even says it from the citation. Other sources from the citations confirm that. Could I say that it has been dubbed the world's first smart basketball hoop by Yahoo Sports and Sports Business Journal? Again these are factual and unbiased but would that work? Samh100 (talk) 14:13, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Please note that I have just edited it and fixed. Samh100 (talk) 14:23, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

December 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Drmies (talk) 15:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Samh100 (talk) 02:22, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

I am willing and want to edit neutrally and would like to make the edits to do so. Please let me know if I can answer anything else. Samh100 (talk) 02:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)

This last edit of yours suggests to me that you are either unwilling or incapable of editing neutrally, despite the many suggestions that have been offered to you by other editors. Drmies (talk) 15:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: (huupe) (December 28)

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

Drmies (talk) 15:20, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Thank you for looking over this over. I have followed the instructions and guidelines of the critiques. I am happy to change anything needed. Can you explain how this can be approved? Everything is factual and cited. Samh100 (talk) 15:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, you have not followed the instructions and the guidelines, and it sounds like you did not look at the link I posted in the explanation of your block. Drmies (talk) 17:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I believe that there is some miscommunication as I am not intending to do anything incorrectly. I do not see any link with explanation. I only want to do this the correct and proper way. Samh100 (talk) 17:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Copied from above: This last edit of yours suggests to me that you are either unwilling or incapable of editing neutrally, despite the many suggestions that have been offered to you by other editors. Drmies (talk) 15:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I am happy to remove those two edits or if they can be removed. I am willing to write neutrally and apologize for any misunderstanding as it was an honest mistake. Can those be removed? Samh100 (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I solely want to follow the guidelines with Wikipedia and make sure that the page fits. Those edits can be taken out. Thank you for taking the time to look this over. Please let me know if there are any other edits to be removed. Samh100 (talk) 21:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Well, you could follow the guidelines in the template and request an unblock the regular way--but really, with every single edit you make it more clear that you are incapable of editing by our guidelines. Why can't you be bothered reading what it says on this talk page? Drmies (talk) 01:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Thank you for your response. I have asked about how to not make this anything about marketing. If you look above, it was approved to write that the claim for "first smart hoop" could be made if it did have sources. I will remove it if you do not approve.

I am happy to remove that. Every other change has been followed and made. Can you please let me know of any other ones that you see. I want to be compliant with this. Samh100 (talk) 01:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)