User talk:TraceySear840

Welcome!

Hello, TraceySear840!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
Always use edit summaries to explain your changes.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 17:54, 21 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Portal Fernandez Concha (January 25)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Ruud Buitelaar 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 submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The section on 2024 crime is not encyclopedic, see WP:SENSATIONAL. The article cites enough reliable sources to establish notability but also cites sources that are questionable, such as Urbatorium, a blog (see WP:BLOGS). The important source at Patrimonio Urbano is inaccesible, which is unfortunate because i suspect copy-paste, see WP:C-P. The section on contemporary use and community impact has links to tourism, restaurant and hotel sites that are promotional in nature, see WP:PROMO. In sum, although I recognize that Portal Fernandez Concha should have an article on the english Wikipedia, this draft needs a lot of reworking. Please look at the article on the spanish Wikipedia which is a lot better.

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:Portal Fernandez Concha 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.

Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, TraceySear840! 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! Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 03:49, 25 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Portal Fernandez Concha (January 27)

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

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

blogspot, facebook, youtube, and portalparanormal.net as well as the tourismo site all have to go per WP:SPS and WP:RS. I don't see a claim to notability and the recent crime coverage doesn't make the area notable.

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:Portal Fernandez Concha 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.

Chris Troutman (talk) 19:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

January 2024

You may be blocked from editing without further warning if you make any further edits without responding to the inquiry you received regarding undisclosed paid editing. Continued promotion of the Portal will result in you being blocked. This is your last warning. Star Mississippi 21:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi Where is this inquiry? TraceySear840 (talk) 15:40, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

February 2024: Portal Fernández Concha edits

TraceySear840, I am troubled by your edits to the article. The book you cite does not appear to mention either Portal Fernández Concha or Portal Sierra Bella. It includes architectural drawings of the Bolsa de Comercio de Santiago (I presume that's what you were referring to as the Stock Exchange), but where in the book do you find that that was initially established on an upper floor of Portal Fernández Concha? See the Policies and Guidelines link in the "Welcome" template you received (top of this page): one of our basic principles is that we try to provide a source for everything we state in an article. That's what references are primarily for; they aren't just an indication that the topic is important, or a place for the reader to find out more, although they also have both these functions. Also, more isn't necessarily better. Repeating the information about the history of the building in separate sections doesn't improve the article so much as make it repetitive. Lengthy coverage of accusations of criminal uses didn't improve it either. Encyclopedia articles tend to be shorter than news articles or book sections because they summarize what other sources say, and because they can use links to refer readers to explanations of other topics.

Some of your over-long writing in the article may be because you are a new editor. But your posts at Chris Troutman's user talk looked as if you were using ChatGPT or some other AI to create text. I don't know whether you kept looking at the section you started at the administrators' noticeboard (that's a link to the archive), but many editors there, not just Chris Troutman, believed you had been using AI, and we strongly discourage that anywhere on English Wikipedia. One reason is that such large language models have no controls for factuality; they sometimes write falsehoods, and they sometimes manufacture plausible-looking references that don't exist. Never use AI (or machine translation, for that matter) in Wikipedia articles. Was any of the text you added to Portal Fernández Concha generated using an AI program? Because that might explain the misuse of that book reference. The book exists, but it doesn't support what you added.

I wonder also whether you wanted to make the text longer in order to fit in more photos. I understand that it's a shame we can't use all the beautiful photos of places and buildings that are on Commons, but think about it: for many topics, there will be tens or even hundreds of images. Articles simply can't include all of them; that's why we link to the Commons category.

You asked Star Mississippi above where the question about conflict of interest (COI) was asked. I can't find it, myself. The closest I can find is that at the noticeboard, Chris Troutman said that they believed you to be a paid editor: TraceySear840 is pushing a draft which I declined (weak sourcing and no claim to notability). I get walls of desperation-mode chatbot text in return. Why? New editor is probably an undeclared paid editor not from an English-speaking country because regular fans and hobbyists don't respond that way to a declined draft. So here are some links: Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, with definition. Key quotation: COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. It undermines public confidence and risks causing public embarrassment to the individuals and companies being promoted. Editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing. ... Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to change an affected article's content. Anyone editing for pay must disclose who is paying them, who the client is, and any other relevant affiliation; this is a requirement of the Wikimedia Foundation. COI editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, and can propose changes on article talk pages instead. Note that "conflict of interest" is much broader than "paid", and that editors who are paid for any of their edits—whether in isolation or as a part of a job—are required to disclose that fact and who is paying. The relevant section on editing for pay is here. (And that policy is important enough that it's also linked under "Tips" in the Welcome template you received.) So the question that Star Mississippi was referring to, which you may not have been directly asked, is basically: Do you have any personal or financial reason for writing the article on Portal Fernández Concha? (Star Mississippi is an admin, and I'm going to ping another admin who responded at the noticeboard, El_C, because there may be some specific wording of the question that I haven't used.) Yngvadottir (talk) 03:32, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your wording seem fine, Yngvadottir, but in the interest of additional clarity, I've added the standard disclosure below. El_C 14:59, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yngvadottir I appreciate your effort to be fair and thorough in your response. However, I kindly ask you to consider the following points.

1.) Why would someone compose a paid article centered on topics such as crime and delinquency? I found the article, both in Spanish and English, lacking in substance. There was no payment or other benefit involved, just personal interest. However, my enthusiasm is waning as it seems my efforts are not appreciated and are causing inexplicable upset.

2.) I did not use AI; this is my own work. It took a long time.

3.) I cannot confirm whether you have read the book or not. However, having read it myself in Spanish, it's abundantly clear that the portal is mentioned numerous times, a total of 15 instances to be precise. I took the time to work on the sections pertaining to it, only to find them promptly deleted.

4.) I believe it's important for us to be mindful of being Anglo-centric.

5.) You have accused me of using a false citation. Allow me to demonstrate where to find the citations (an apology would be appropriate).

Marchant Pereira 10

Santiago de Chile

Av. Libertador Bernardo O’Higg ins 390

Santiago de Chile

Av. Libertador Bernardo O’Higg ins 651

Santiago de Chile

Registro Propiedad Intelectual

Inscripción Nº 208.527

Santiago de Chile

IS BN 978-956-8306-08-3 (Obra completa)

IS BN 978-956-8306-73-1 (Tomo cuadragésimo cuarto)

Page 41: Portal Fernandez Concha and Portal Sierra Bella

Page 70: Three references mentioned

Page 158: Discussion on the stock exchange

Page 181: Reference to the commercial exchange

Page 809: General information regarding the Portal

6.) I didn't extend the text to accommodate more photos.

I genuinely want to avoid conflicts. My intention is solely to contribute positively. I welcome constructive criticism and truly value your feedback. However, I would greatly appreciate it if you could verify my citations before simply deleting them. Please feel free to rewrite or modify them as needed, but kindly refrain from making unfair accusations against me. TraceySear840 (talk) 15:12, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:HOWTOBEABULL

Make up stuff and repeat it

Criticize an editor for what they did NOT do TraceySear840 (talk) 15:22, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, TraceySear840. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. El_C 14:59, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for bringing the conflict of interest guidelines to my attention. I understand Wikipedia's commitment to neutrality and the importance of avoiding biased contributions. While I have a particular interest in the topics I've edited, I assure you that my intention is to contribute constructively and factually. I will review the COI guidelines and ensure my future contributions comply with Wikipedia's policies. If I have any conflicts to disclose, I will do so according to the guidelines. Thank you for guiding new editors like myself to better understand and adhere to Wikipedia's standards. TraceySear840 (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@El C TraceySear840 (talk) 15:16, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@El C additionally I want to clarify that my contributions were made in good faith, with the aim of enhancing the content based on reliable information. as mentioned to @Yngvadottir

"1.) Why would someone compose a paid article centered on topics such as crime and delinquency? I found the article, both in Spanish and English, lacking in substance. There was no payment or other benefit involved, just personal interest. However, my enthusiasm is waning as it seems my efforts are not appreciated and are causing inexplicable upset." TraceySear840 (talk) 15:19, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@El C worth noting WP:HOWTOBEABULLY TraceySear840 (talk) 15:20, 18 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Ruud Buitelaar had found the wrong book. I am sorry; neither of us noticed the difference in title. Thank you for clarifying that you do not have a conflict of interest, and that you don't use AI. As you can see from the noticeboard discussion, several editors have accused you of both. I'm very happy that the accusations are untrue. Yngvadottir (talk) 00:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Yngvadottir, @El C, please note that I found the right book, the one that @TraceySear840 cited no less than 13 times. Please check the old version and you´ll see that the reference was to "Cartografía histórica de Chile", never to "Chile Ilustrado". I did not make a mistake and I consider it bad faith on part of @TraceySear840 to accuse me of finding the wrong book. All this continues to be the fault of @TraceySear840´s flawed editing using AI. You can look at my talk page for evidence of this. I would also like @Star Mississippi to look at this discussion since @TraceySear840 continues to promote the Portal Fernández Concha despite the warning given on this same page, see above. Ruud Buitelaar (talk) 01:10, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping @Ruud Buitelaar. I disagree with my colleague @Yngvadottir here about Sear's edits. This probably will end up back at ANI, unfortunately. Star Mississippi 01:14, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm probably least familiar with what's happening here, by a lot. As such, among other things, I did not understand the relevance and connection of the humor page WP:HOWTOBEABULLY to this dispute. I just wanted to add the formal {{uw-coi}} disclosure in the interest of clarity. HTH. El_C 03:54, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Sear realizes that's a humor page. Star Mississippi 04:04, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Star Mississippi: I hadn't even looked at that page ... @El C: The background to my choice of you to ping is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1148#Chris Troutman - Portal Fernandez Concha, which I linked in my wall o' text above. That sprawling discussion was never resolved. TraceySear840 resumed editing on February 15; after responding at Talk:Portal Fernández Concha, they made a fresh expansion of the article. I found they'd also posted a query here. Thanks for doing the formal stuff in response to my request. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

New drafts

TraceySear840, I'm thrilled to see you started Draft:Teatro Municipal de Chillán to fill one of our gaps. Thank you! But I see that it's tagged as using the WMF translation tool. Use of the tool on English Wikipedia is strongly discouraged; you were able to use it to create a draft, but to make an article directly, you would have to be an "extended confirmed" editor (30 days and at least 500 edits): see Wikipedia:Content translation tool. The reason is that we have a lot of problems on English Wikipedia with machine translations (a huge backlog of well-meaning poor translations waiting to be checked), so we have a local policy requiring editors to either do the translating themselves, or completely check and fix the translated material before saving it in mainspace (Help:Translation#Avoid unedited machine translations). Please don't use the tool; translate yourself.

That is presumably the reason you created a new Draft:Casa Colorada when we already have a stub article, Casa Colorada? I've redirected the draft to the existing article and left a note on the talk page; there's no reason to start a new draft when an article exists and can simply be made better. But the ban on the content translation tool means you can't use its output there; in any case, it would be faster to make your own expansion, either translating or not.

I'm sorry we have so many rules. But I won't show you that backlog page of bad translations because it's terrifying. Yngvadottir (talk) 09:51, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Plaza de Armas (disambiguation)

Hello, TraceySear840. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Plaza de Armas (disambiguation), 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) 19:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Teatro Municipal de Chillán

Hello, TraceySear840. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Teatro Municipal de Chillán, 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) 23:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Plaza de Armas (disambiguation)

Hello, TraceySear840. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Plaza de Armas".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 20:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Teatro Municipal de Chillán

Hello, TraceySear840. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or draft page you started, "Teatro Municipal de Chillán".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material, 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.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 22:13, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]