User talk:Nsbfrank

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

See

WP:COI

.

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:Beyond Vision 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.

Greenman (talk) 18:45, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Nsbfrank! 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! Greenman (talk) 18:45, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Nsbfrank, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Nsbfrank|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 09:28, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello @Theroadislong Thank you for your kind suggestion. I can't find the form you are referring to where I can declare my COI; please kindly provide me with a guide. Thank you. Nsbfrank (talk) 09:54, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's literally just above your reply here. Theroadislong (talk) 09:58, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

After declaring PAID on your User page, if you intend to continue to work on the draft, I recommend removing the specifications tables. David notMD (talk) 09:37, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, @David notMD I appreciate your comment. Do you have any other suggestions, apart from the table, that will make my article more transparent? Nsbfrank (talk) 09:45, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Beyond Vision. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 09:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much@Theroadislong. I've made a couple of changes to the article following all the incredible comments here. Now, I would like to kindly request further editorial suggestions and revisions before I attempt resubmitting. Nsbfrank (talk) 11:32, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Nsbfrank, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Nsbfrank|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 11:35, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have already added the template above the draft for transparency. I tried the paid tag but the editor suggested connected contributors paid instead {{connected contributor (paid)|user=Nsbfrank

The WP:COIRESPONSE . [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] · [[Special:Contribs/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) has been paid by unknown.

Nsbfrank (talk) 11:40, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please use the correct format per {{paid|user=Nsbfrank|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Theroadislong (talk) 12:12, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @TheroadislongI have done that. Nsbfrank (talk) 13:59, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Reads like it was written by the marketing department...full of ridiculous promotion, "company's prowess" "commitment to innovation and technological excellence" "technical prowess" "showcasing its commitment to innovation"

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:Beyond Vision 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:36, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@TheroadislongI've made a couple of changes to improve the post. I would appreciate it if you could kindly highlight areas that need further improvement. Nsbfrank (talk) 15:39, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have made no changes since the decline? Theroadislong (talk) 15:43, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the comment. Yes, I did rephrase the previous draft, remove the tables, added the COI declaration, and focus more on sources that validate the statements in the article. Right now, I'm currently addressing the areas you mentioned. Nsbfrank (talk) 15:48, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It will need

WP:TNT and a complete re-write referring ONLY to what reliable independent sources say. Theroadislong (talk) 15:50, 21 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

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

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.

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

• in-depth
  (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent
  of the subject
  

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. 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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Beyond Vision 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:40, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you@Theroadislong for the contribution. Even though I'm not very sure of the references that are not valid, the company has multiple academic and external publications. However, I have revised the reference sources again following your suggestion. Nsbfrank (talk) 15:09, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Beyond Vision. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 15:14, 23 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 23:48, 10 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]