User talk:April Fain

Hello, April Fain, and

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It appears that you may be building a

WP:WALLEDGARDEN of articles, for which further scrutiny will be requested. Thank you, 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:45, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 14:56, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Totally don't understand. I spent 11 hours reading all the pages and pages of stuff about WIki and topics in textbooks aren't even allowed? I understand the need to police Wiki, but on the other hand, it is not accessible to normal people due to the amount of work involved. It means, that mostly publicists, marketing people and people with CoI will be the ones to invest the hours it takes. And, that's contradictory to the purpose of Wiki, I think... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 15:55, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered,

PNG file taken from the textbook cited in the article.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 15:56, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

Wikipedia:Non-free content review#File:SCOAP Theory.jpg is based on the same concern about the other image you uploaded. DMacks (talk) 08:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that you should read Conflict of interest, as your edits suggest that you are close to the subjects that you are creating articles for. Mikenorton (talk) 15:11, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Again, don't understand. Of course, anyone involved in a Wiki articles are close to the subject.... otherwise it wouldn't be worth all the effort. For example, how does a Coaching certification or theory get published. Why is MBA in WIki or why is Evolution in WIki? Both represent a certification or a theory... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 15:59, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. As it stands, this page qualifies for

The COI and notability rules apply to articles about people and non-commercial organizations and "good causes" as well as to commercial companies - see Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause.

There is good advice at

Thanks, but of course I read that site.... I'm not connected to the org but of course I want employers to see what my SCOAP Certification and training (delivered by this foundation) means... — Preceding unsigned comment added by April Fain (talk • contribs) 16:02, July 4, 2015‎ (UTC)

If you have read

notability

, as explained above. That is because Wikipedia does not ask "Is this important?", but the more objective question "Is there evidence that people not directly connected with this think it important?"

The most important thing for you to do now is to improve the independent referencing of your article, otherwise many of them are likely to be nominated for deletion. There are more detailed notability guidelines for academics at WP:Notability (academics), and for books at WP:Notability (books). The references to a WP:Walled garden above refer to a concern that these articles are about a small number of people and their activities, all within a closed system. The key question is, have their ideas had impact, and attracted comment, outside the group?

A small detail: when posting on talk pages (but not in articles) it is conventional to indent successive replies by adding one or more colon characters to the start of paragraphs, as I have done here, and also to make clear who said what when by "signing" your comments by ending them with a group of four "tilde" characters ~~~~, which the system will turn into a "signature" of your username and the time and date, like this: JohnCD (talk) 21:54, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see

• The issues re: your contributions have been very well explained above--to say that they're not understood really does suggest the problem of conflict of interest editing. Thanks, 2601:188:0:ABE6:99FD:4E02:9E12:4A31 (talk) 16:25, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Possible walled garden by new user. Thank you. KrakatoaKatie 22:49, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Note: It looks like you already received a message about this further up your Talk page, so this message is redundant. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:17, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello April Fain! I just wanted to drop you note that will hopefully help you with Talk page discussions going forward. The most important to remember in Talk page discussions (including on your own page) is to "sign" all of your posts using four tildes, like so: ~~~~. I've gone ahead and signed your earlier replies above, but it would be good if you could remember to use the ~~~~ to sign your Talk page posts from now on... In addition, it is helpful to use a colon, like so: :, to "indent" your replies (it looks like you've figured this part out on your own!...). If you have any other questions, feel free to contact me. --IJBall (contribs • talk) 23:16, 4 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:37, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of Andy Habermacher

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of Theo Peters

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:38, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of Argang Ghadiri

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:39, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of Klaus Grawe

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of Consistency Theory Model

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:40, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of SCOAP-Profile

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Speedy deletion nomination of Neuroleadership - A Journey Through The Brain for Business Leaders

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the

Article Wizard

.

Thank you.

A tag has been placed on

the guidelines on spam

.

If you can indicate why the subject of this page is not blatant advertising,

citations from independent reliable sources to ensure that the page will be verifiable. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Jytdog (talk) 01:41, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Jytdog (talk) 01:45, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please see below...

Hi

Hi April. I work on conflict of interest issues here in WP, and saw the posting at ANI. As you can see I have gone through and tagged each of the articles you've created so that your COI is disclosed at each of them, and have also nominated each of them for speedy deletion. I am sorry but in my view none of them are subjects for Wikipedia. The sources are just not there. I posted at

WP:COIN

as there are a cadre of editors there who are used to working on COI editing and their expertise will be useful in reviewing the articles if they survive speedy deletion.

I realize all this may be somewhat bewildering - I am sorry about that.

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work, and managing COI is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. That is so, so important, and I am sorry that you stumbled into COI editing without understanding what was going on. I appreciate your boldness very much! That is of the esssence of Wikipedia. If you would apply your skills and boldness where you don't have a COI, Wikipedia would surely be the better for it.

Happy to discuss, if you have any questions, and good luck to you. I am watching this page so you can just reply here, if you would like to talk. Best regardss Jytdog (talk) 01:52, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Don't be too discouraged

To help you understand the initial reaction to your articles, let me explain that Wikipedia suffers a great deal from people who want to use it for promotional purposes. Sometime these are directly commercial, a user promoting his own book, company or pop band, or (worse still) a paid agent writing promotional articles for hire. Unless this is controlled, Wikipedia ceases to be an encyclopedia and becomes another "notice-board" site like Facebook, and its articles are worth no more than Facebook pages. Therefore, a great deal of volunteer time and energy has to be spent on patrolling new pages and entries.

Apart from the commercial spammers, there is also a large class of new users who think Wikipedia is the ideal place to publicise something new. Self-published authors, for instance, are routinely advised to "use social media to spread the word" and think Wikipedia should be part of their campaign. This is a misunderstanding of the role of an encyclopedia, which is to summarise material which has already been published in

reliable sources. The fundamental policy Wikipedia:No original research

includes:

"If no reliable

third-party sources

can be found on a topic, Wikipedia should not have an article about it. If you discover something new, Wikipedia is not the place to announce such a discovery."

Your articles have been raised at the

original research

.

There is inevitably a steep learning curve with Wikipedia, but do not be discouraged, it is worth persevering. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 08:28, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

File:SCOAP Theory.jpg listed for deletion

A file that you uploaded or altered,

Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. DMacks (talk) 16:02, 5 July 2015 (UTC)[reply

]

Your submission at Articles for creation: SCOAP Theory (July 13)

Articles for Creation

has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sulfurboy was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability—see the

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:SCOAP Theory 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 17:36, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! April Fain, 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! Sulfurboy (talk) 17:36, 13 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:SCOAP Theory concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:SCOAP Theory, 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.

talk) 02:07, 4 January 2016 (UTC)[reply

]

Your draft article, Draft:SCOAP Theory

Hello, April Fain. It has been over six months since you last edited your

Articles for Creation draft article submission, "SCOAP Theory

".

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. JMHamo (talk) 19:10, 13 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Human Brains Foundation (January 16)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject

independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies). 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.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

This draft has no references. Notability cannot be established without references. If this draft is resubmitted without providing references, it should be

nominated for deletion

. This page has been declined or rejected as an abandoned draft. If it is not edited further within six months after it has been declined or rejected, it will be

deleted as a disused draft

.

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:Human Brains Foundation 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
  db-self
  }}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• 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 use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, April Fain! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 00:00, 16 January 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Human Brains Foundation

Hello, April Fain. It has been over six months since you last edited the

Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Human Brains Foundation

".

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 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}}, {{db-draft}}, 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. Interstellarity (talk) 16:50, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]