User talk:WyggestonsTrinity

This is WyggestonsTrinity'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: Wyggestons Hospital (October 3)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

This building may meet WP:NPLACE, but you are using Wikipedia to advertise / promote the organisation which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Your username is also in breach of our terms and conditions. Please see WP:IU

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:Wyggestons Hospital 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) 12:03, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, WyggestonsTrinity! 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) 12:03, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I appreciate that some of the references are for the Wyggeston's website, but others are from reputable scourges and established governing bodies such as the Almshouse Association.

Please could you provide some examples of where the text comes across as self-promotion of the charity? As I believe that it is quite neutral and doesn't hold opinion, only factual information that has been taken from written books from more than a hundred years ago.

I hope this isn't coming across in the wrong way, I'm just looking to understand in order that a page can be created for Wyggeston's Hospital, simply for informational and historical purposes?

Thank you and i look forward to hearing back. WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 12:33, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @WyggestonsTrinity.

Your article has some okay sources and some not okay sources. You sourced Wikipedia itself twice, which is WP:CIRCULAR and not allowed. You also had sections that were unsourced, such as the Masters and Governors.

The biggest problem with your draft was that it read like an advertisement for the organisation. Wikipedia articles should summarise what independent, reliable, secondary sources state about a subject. This summarising should be done in a fully neutral and dispassionate way, with no active voice. You used "Our" and "We" quite a bit, which is contrary to WP:VOICE.

I think, if you do get unblocked, you need to read WP:BACKWARDS and WP:YFA which will give you some pointers.

Let me know if you have any questions, Qcne (talk) 19:21, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Okay that makes sense, so if I successfully get unblocked, can I try a new draft with more neutral language for submission?

And with regards to sourcing Wikipedia itself, would this just instead need to be a link to another article and then to instead use sources of other methods?

If for certain sections there isn't a source I can use via the internet - am I able to reference books and ledgers from over the past couple of centuries?

I'll have a read through the pages that you kindly linked to better understand how to go forward.

Thank you for being so patient, it's very much appreciated. WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 08:37, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

No worries @WyggestonsTrinity.

If you do get unblocked, then you're free to edit the existing draft at Draft:Wyggestons_Hospital even under a new username. It will be automatically deleted in five months if there are no edits to it at all.

You're free to inter-link other Wikipedia articles throughout the body of the text, they just can't be sourced. Check out WP:WIKILINK.

As long as the source is published then it can be offline. Just make sure to format the reference correctly to include e.g. the ISBN. The relevant policy on sources is at Wikipedia:Reliable_sources and a good tutorial on referencing with the (easier to use) Visual Editor is at WP:INTREFVE.

I also replied to your unblock request below, giving you instructions on what to do next.

Wikipedia is quite complicated and we have lots of policies and guidelines, so you're certainly not the first and won't be the last to approach writing an article in the wrong way! If you have any questions I'd be happy to help. Qcne (talk) 08:44, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2023

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because your account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, your username gives the impression that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

If you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization, you may request unblock and a username change. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement; and
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked; and
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked; and
Provide a new username.

To do this, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken and in use by another account. You can go here to search and see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is available to be taken.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

WyggestonsTrinity (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

AlmshouseWT (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Apparently the username in place is inappropriate.

Decline reason:

As you know, the username is only one small part of the problem here. You need to address the other problems, too. Yamla (talk) 12:34, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Could you then suggest a user that would be okay and allow for the block to be lifted?

In regards to the other problems, they have been noted and addressed below (please have a look, or if easier just let me know and I can add it to this chat also?) therefore I'm just awaiting the response for that one.

Could you confirm why the new username has been declined? WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 12:55, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WyggestonsTrinity, you need to do the following in order to correctly have the unblock request go through:

- Make a WP:PAID editing disclosure. See that link for instructions.

- Re-iterate you understand the username policy, and why you were blocked in the first place.

- Describe what contributions to Wikipedia you would make if unblocked. Qcne (talk) 19:23, 3 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@WyggestonsTrinity just a hint, you still need to follow those three steps I mentioned above in order to have your block successfully considered. Qcne (talk) 08:46, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

WyggestonsTrinity (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

MinseokH (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

The previous username didn't meet guidelines and I would like to rectify that and have the account unblocked if possible please WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 08:43, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As noted, your username is not the only issue here. Please address the points made by Qcne. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please place new posts at the bottom for proper discussion flow. This may be easier to do if you refrain from using the Reply function(which is imperfect and also does not accomodate unblock requests well) and open the edit window directly by clicking "edit" at the top of the screen. 331dot (talk) 08:47, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

WyggestonsTrinity (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

MinseokH (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I can confirm that no payment is being exchanged for writing the article, not for any of the input on Wikipedia. I am just attempting to create the page for informational purposes. I also confirm that I understand why I was blocked in the first instance, due to it being a conflict of interest and not meeting guidelines. I apologise for this oversight. If I were to be unblocked, I would like to provide information in regards to Leicester's oldest Almshouses and explain the history of them. I appreciate that his must be done in an unbiased manner, and will be careful in my wording to ensure that it remains neutral and will not come across as promotion of the charity itself, but rather as a means of understand the purpose of the Charity and the history behind it. I also appreciate your patience in my understanding the process, as I know it can be a little slow going, but I am trying to make an effort, I am being sure to now read all of the necessary information that I need in order to understand the process behind what makes a good and valid article. I hope you will take into consideration my being unblocked in order that I can hopefully contribute to Wikipedia going forward. Thank you.

Decline reason:

You seem to indicate you are going to stop using your account, so I am closing this request. If you change your mind, please make a new request. 331dot (talk) 08:04, 7 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What specifically is the exact nature of your conflict of interest? Also, are you aware that you can be a paid editor even if no payment is being exchanged for writing the article? --Yamla (talk) 09:00, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The conflict was that the username was related to the article being written and as such can be seen as self-promotion of the charity. This was a misstep on my end. I can, however, confirm that whilst I am linked to the Charity, I have not been asked by the charity to draft the page, it was something that I chose to do as I thought it would be good for the information to be available, since it's of historic significance. I hope that answers your question, but please do let me know if you need further information.

Thank you. WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 09:05, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The exact nature of your conflict of interest, please. "linked to the Charity" is not enough. Note based on the tiny bit of information you've been willing to divulge, you very likely do count as a paid editor. --Yamla (talk) 09:06, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am a receptionist for part of the Charity. But if this is off of my own back, then how can that count as being a paid editor? It feels as though any answer I give won't be good enough to pass the unblocking. Please could you confirm what would be needed for the unblock request to be accepted? I would note that I wasn't being purposefully vague, this is my first time signing up to create a page and I'm just trying to learn how to do that best.

I appreciate that my first draft used language that may have come across as advertisement and I would really like the chance to rectify that and create a better draft for submission as I do believe that it's a very interesting history that the Almshouses hold, and with the connection to the Royal Family (Duchy of Lancaster) I thought it may be of interest to a fair number of people. WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 09:11, 4 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

"Receptionist for the charity" absolutely counts as paid editing. Wikipedia has articles, not pages(which has a broader meaning here). We're going to want to see an edit history from you of edits in other areas before permitting you to indirectly submit a draft about your charity. Are there any other topics you might edit about? 331dot (talk) 08:39, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly LGBT content, but honestly, I think I may just delete the account as it's causing more frustration than it isn't.

Thank you anyway. WyggestonsTrinity (talk) 08:56, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It is not possible to delete an account, but you may stop using and abandon it. Note that if you change your mind in the future, you will need to return to this account and request unblocking, as you personally are blocked from editing, not just your account. If you are going to stop using the account, please let us know and we will close your request. 331dot (talk) 11:01, 5 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]