User talk:Yanalfailat

Your submission at Articles for creation: LXL (September 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 Dodger67 was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

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 User:Yanalfailat/LXL and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Yanalfailat, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 13:56, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing

Hello Yanalfailat. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Boutique law firm,. 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. Paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice.

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, and if it does not, 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, 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:Yanalfailat. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Yanalfailat|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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Brianhe (talk) 17:29, 28 September 2015 (UTC).[reply]

Hello Brianhe, thank you for your interest and for your efforts in ensuring that Wikipedia articles are of standard. I can confirm that I am not being compensated for drafting this article in any way. I have read the Wikipedia guidelines and drafted the article in a neutral manner and ensured that there are no promotional statements therein. Moreover, any statement of fact which I have included in the article was supported by an independent secondary source. I would like to complete this article, please advise.Yanalfailat (talk) 08:37, 29 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Yanalfailat: You were in IRC yesterday, correct? You stated you worked for LXL, which I believe means you have to put the paid template on your userpage. Pinging Primefac, as they know more than me on the subject. -- Kethrus |talk to me 06:13, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LXL (September 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:LXL and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:31, 30 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LXL (October 1)

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

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 when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:LXL and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

-- Kethrus |talk to me 12:51, 1 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

October 2015

Your recent editing history at Boutique law firm shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you get reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Even if there was an article written about the company you work for, it would be inappropriate for you to be adding a link to it at the top of a list of other firms. Please don't replace it again. SmartSE (talk) 15:40, 2 October 2015 (UTC).[reply]

@Smartse - Why is it innappropriate to add my firms link at the top of the list. The category is Energy and Natural Resources and alphabetically that is where it should be i.e at the top of the list. Look at the article, why is :Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner (Washington, D.C.)at the top of the list. Please explain why is it inappropriate - on that basis all entries there are inappropriate. It is very simple, the article aims to explain the concept of boutique law firms and list some accordingly I have added LXL LLP which is a boutique law firm specialised in Energy and Natural Resources. My entry followed the style and format of the article - please advise.

Yanalfailat (talk) 16:53, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:CSC and WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS, and stop adding redlinks to the article. The article is not a directory of any kind of law firms. Right now a few most-notable firms are listed. If you think a certain firm should be added, write the article first. Of course you will need to heed all relevant COI processes, and as a single-purpose account, your edits will be looked at a certain way. — Brianhe (talk) 20:01, 2 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: LXL (October 18)

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

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing, so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia.
What you can do: Add citations (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners) to secondary reliable sources that are entirely independent of the subject.

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:LXL and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

LaMona (talk) 19:08, 18 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:LXL concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:LXL, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:34, 19 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:LXL

Hello, Yanalfailat. It has been over six months since you last edited your Articles for Creation draft article submission, "LXL".

In accordance with our policy that Articles for Creation is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}} or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. 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. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 18:27, 22 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]