User talk:Simon Gjokaj

Concern regarding Draft:Gazetarja

Hello, Simon Gjokaj. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Gazetarja, 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) 12:02, 22 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gazetarja (February 10)

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:

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.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Gazetarja 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) 22:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Simon Gjokaj! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 22:44, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Hello Simon Gjokaj. 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:Simon Gjokaj. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Simon Gjokaj|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) 10:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Draft:Gazetarja, you may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 16:05, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i did rewrite based on research from different sources i also watched some videos to require wikipedia requests.. what is the issue now? Simon Gjokaj (talk) 16:11, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The content is entirely inappropriate for an encyclopaedia and has been rejected so it will not be considered further, please find another topic to edit. Theroadislong (talk) 16:18, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

okay can you please remove completely the article ? Simon Gjokaj (talk) 16:31, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gazetarja (February 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by 331dot were:

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 brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of 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.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Gazetarja 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.

331dot (talk) 10:14, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is not paid or promotional this is simply information about a legal company Simon Gjokaj (talk) 10:19, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you have any relationship with the company? Note that Wikipedia is not for merely providing information about companies and is not a mere directory. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. 331dot (talk) 10:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gazetarja (February 13)

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 Theroadislong was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 10:25, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i dont understand why i am being rejected it doesnt make any sense to me Simon Gjokaj (talk) 10:31, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see my comment above. Again, do you have any type of relationship with this company? 331dot (talk) 10:32, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This is the company i work for, sure i have relationship! Simon Gjokaj (talk) 10:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you work for the company, you are required by the Terms of Use to make a formal paid editing disclosure. You must do this now, on your user page. (User:Simon Gjokaj) I provided instructions above(to which you replied that you were not paid, which does not build trust here).

Wikipedia is not a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. We are interested in what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen to say about a company(and not based on materials from the company or its associates). Please read Your First Article and conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 10:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am the developer and designer of the website to this company i also do the maintainance! Simon Gjokaj (talk) 10:37, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Very good, please copy and place the required disclosure, {{paid|user=Simon Gjokaj|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}, on your user page. replacing "insert name" with the name of your company. 331dot (talk) 10:41, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

is it okay now ? Simon Gjokaj (talk) 10:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is now, after I removed the coding that suppressed its proper display. Please read Your First Article and conflict of interest. Again, we are interested in what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about your company with significant coverage. Significant coverage goes beyond merely documenting the activities of the company, and goes into detail about its significance or influence as the source sees it, not as the company sees its own significance. It is usually very difficult for people in your position to do that; you need to set aside everything you know about your company and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people can't do that. 331dot (talk) 10:51, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i really dont know what else to do it took me more than 9 hours to write that based on public way its nothing personal or that it is unknown for the public, i also haven't been paid to do the writing or to do this job - i did it voluntary to give people information. But since you finding lots of issues should i pay someone to do it for us ? Simon Gjokaj (talk) 11:01, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I've tried to tell you, you misunderstand our purpose here and what we are looking for. You paying someone to write just transfers these issues to them(if you do that, they must also declare as paid editors). Have you read the pages I've indicated here? We don't want to know what the company says about itself, we want to know what reliable sources wholly independent of your company choose to say about it. 331dot (talk) 11:07, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Drafts may not be resubmitted once rejected, at least not without radical changes that conform to the guidelines I have tried to inform you about. I again urge you to read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 11:17, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh just forget about it - i cant do anything better and i cant do more changes i'm just giving up Simon Gjokaj (talk) 11:28, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. It may help you to understand if you also read the five pillars of Wikipedia, as well as this question and answer page. You have found out the hard way that writing a new article is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia. If you are interested in contributing to this encyclopedia in other ways, you may find the new user tutorial helpful. Good day to you. 331dot (talk) 11:47, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (February 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 331dot was:

We're sorry, but we cannot accept blank submissions. If in fact you did include text within the article, but it isn't showing, please make sure that any extra text above your entry is removed, as it may be causing it to hide and not be shown to the reviewer.

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 User:Simon Gjokaj/sandbox 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.

331dot (talk) 11:21, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Gazetarja

Hello, Simon Gjokaj. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Gazetarja".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been deleted. When you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 17:59, 16 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]