User talk:StephLy60618

This is StephLy60618'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: Zachary Bookman (February 26)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and 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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Zachary Bookman and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Zachary Bookman, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 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.

Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, StephLy60618! Having an article 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! Devonian Wombat (talk) 03:23, 26 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Zachary Bookman has been accepted

Zachary Bookman, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~Kvng (talk) 16:49, 24 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest on OpenGov

Hi StephLy60618! I saw you've made a lot of edits to OpenGov over the past few days, and your only other edits were making a new article for Zachary Bookman. Are you affiliated with OpenGov or otherwise paid by them for your editing work? See Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and the more detailed guidelines at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest — in short, you cannot do this here. You are welcome to contribute to these articles by disclosing your affiliation (such as on your user page) and making suggestions on the talk page at Talk:OpenGov to recommend updates, but a non-affiliated editor has to review your suggestions and decide whether to implement them. I've reverted your recent edits to OpenGov, and I am adding a COI note to Zachary Bookman. I don't want to discourage you from participating in Wikipedia overall, and I'm happy to answer questions to help you. It's just really important for the integrity of Wikipedia to minimize conflicts of interest. Dreamyshade (talk) 15:38, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this information. I will refrain from edits on pages for organizations I am affiliated with. I was removing incorrect and outdated information. I will look into how this should otherwise be handled.

For Zac's page, having been a journalist, I stuck to cite-driven sources. So, what on this page is objectionable besides my having been associated with it? I will happily refrain from future edits, but could we remove the Tag about edits by an affiliated person? Thank you! StephLy60618 (talk) 22:07, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Thanks for being up for learning more about the guidelines here. I put a COI tag on the article about Bookman because it was written with undisclosed COI and hasn’t been substantially revised by non-affiliated editors yet. The article omits information available in independent secondary sources that could potentially be unflattering, such as losing a lawsuit or concerns about fairness. The article also has some sourcing that isn’t strong enough for the claims made — for example, podcasts interviewing the subject are generally considered a primary source here (WP:PRIMARY), suitable mainly for sourcing uncontroversial facts about a person (like where they went to school, age, etc), not for general statements about the software industry. The article does have some reasonably-sourced information, and the subject reasonably qualifies for an article under the notability guidelines, so I don’t want to nominate it for deletion. The COI tag indicates to non-affiliated editors that the article needs their review and revision, and after that happens, I believe it’d be appropriate for a non-affiliated editor to remove the COI tag. Dreamyshade (talk) 22:49, 8 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again! I know that the OpenGov article isn't in good shape to start with, and I appreciate that several of the edits you're making are removing outdated information and clearing out some of the cruft. I can help with improving the article to make some of those kinds of edits, as a person who does not work for OpenGov and has no affiliation with it. But I would need you to make those suggestions on Talk:OpenGov, so that I can review them first, instead of editing the article directly. Dreamyshade (talk) 16:19, 1 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]