User talk:Smartcake

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). 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.

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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Smartcake/sandbox 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Smartcake! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing This is a biography on a living person. I would love assistance in making the article approvable since this is my first of many articles I want to create on people and other topics for Wikipedia. I've been an editor for over 3 years Smartcake (talk) 14:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm extremely concerned now that you take monetary compensation outside Wikipedia to approve content. I hope this is not the case @doublegrazing I just read your user page and would like to request a different moderator to review my submission or help in making the article more "encyclopedic" Smartcake (talk) 14:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You clearly haven't read my user page very carefully, if you think it says that I accept payment for approving content, when it says the exact opposite.

If you have received, or will receive in the future, communications from anyone offering to approve, protect, prevent deletion, etc. articles or drafts, then

1. It isn't me.
2. It is almost certainly a scam.
3. It almost certainly would not work anyway.

Do not pay money to anyone approaching you like that. And please forward the communication to the e-mail address shown at

WP:SCAM

.

And finally, I'm quite happy to not review your drafts going forward, if you wish. We have 1,600+ pending drafts in the system, so I have plenty to be getting on with.

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing I would never pay money to do anything on Wikipedia except donate directly. I read your entire page do not be condescending. It is what was written that made me believe you accept bribes. I also do not need you to threaten me saying you are not going to review my drafts or any hostile inappropriate unprofessional behavior. I simply asked to help make this more suitable for Wikipedia (even though it's an appropriate biography of a living person) You should not be a moderator if you are going to act like this honestly. I asked for assistance from a different moderator as your reputation is tarnished and behavior is unnecessarily rude. I genuinely want to make this more "encyclopedic" and get it approved on Wikipedia. Smartcake (talk) 14:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What on earth are you talking about? It's not condescending to say that you've completely misread my user page.

I'm also not threatening you with anything. You said you want someone else to review your draft, and I said that's absolutely fine with me.

If you think I'm up to no good, drag me to ANI. But stop making unfounded accusations, or I will take you there myself.

So far the facts are that you are trying to publish a promotional, unreferenced BLP, and I have declined it, and asked that it is deleted. That does not change, no matter how many false accusations or insults you hurl at me.

Oh, and by the way, you've moved your draft into the wrong name space. But I'll leave it for you clean up your own mess.

Don't ping me anymore, I've no interest in being attacked further. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing I am so confused. You threatened me. I literally just asked you for help since you are supposed to be the seasoned moderator. I hope Wikipedia removes your moderator privileges. Your behavior is inappropriate. I will figure things out myself. Thanks for letting me know about the wrong name space. I'll do more research on creating a Wikipedia page from scratch and remove any language that makes the biography sound promotional. As unnecessarily rude as you've been I appreciate the lesson. Have a wonderful day Smartcake (talk) 14:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on User:Smartcake/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See
  Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations
  for more information.
• It appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that
  section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion
  .)

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by

@DoubleGrazing This isn't advertising. This is a biography on a living person. May I have more clarity on what would need to be edited so this biography can be approved. Smartcake (talk) 14:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Those two things are not mutually exclusive. This is a biography of a living person (

BLP

) and it is highly promotional.

BLPs have particularly strict referencing requirements. Your draft is effectively unreferenced, because of the two citations, one is to Wikipedia (which creates a circular reference; you cannot use Wikipedia as a source on Wikipedia), the other to Instagram (which is user-generated, and not considered reliable).

For the same reason, there is no evidence that the subject is notable. Notability is a core requirement for inclusion in Wikipedia. In most cases, including this, notability is established through sources: we need to see significant coverage of the subject in multiple secondary sources that are reliable and entirely independent of the subject. As I mentioned already, this draft cites no such source.

And writing, even on genuinely notable subjects, must be neutral and factual, and based on reliable published sources. This was you 'telling the world' about the person in question. That is the definition of promotional: see

WP:YESPROMO

.

HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@DoubleGrazing Incorrect an official news source from 2014 is cited in the article. I am requesting assistance in making it more "encyclopedic" and a different moderator ideally who is eager to assist in helping correct any errors to make this page live and who doesn't have a reputation of accepting compensation outside of Wikipedia like you do. Please refer me to a different moderator if you do not want to assist or help me as again I have other pages to create and do not want this to happen each time I submit. Smartcake (talk) 14:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No one "has" to do anything here. Are you editing for clients? 331dot (talk) 15:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Good morning 331dot I appreciate your help. I'm still learning how to correctly contribute on Wikipedia. I need help with my very first BLP. That's what the misunderstanding is about. Yes, I am a digital media manager trying to create missing pages for artists and businesses that are missing from Wiki Smartcake (talk) 15:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what you told Theroadislong below. If you are editing for clients, the Terms of Use require you to formally disclose that. You do not need to be specifically paid to make edits(otherwise every paid editor would deny being specifically paid to edit). Please follow the instructions provided below. 331dot (talk) 15:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, DoubleGrazing is not a moderator, what we call an administrator. 331dot (talk) 15:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Thank you for educating me. I genuinely am just trying to learn how to properly contribute brand new pages that currently do not exist on Wiki. I am NOT compensated for this. Smartcake (talk) 15:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So you are saying you are a digital media manager, but you are not editing about clients? I just want to be clear here. 331dot (talk) 16:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I am not being compensated whatsoever for the contributions I have previously made or am wanting to add. I volunteered to help my clients with this. I am not being paid for this. Smartcake (talk) 16:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the admission that you're just here to promote your clients on Wikipedia. Canterbury Tail talk 16:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't know when you are "on the clock" at work or "off the clock" volunteering. You are required to make the paid editing disclosure. If one of your next edits does not do this, you will be blocked, and yes, that is a threat. 331dot (talk) 16:11, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Canterbury Tail Canterbury Tail and 331dot there may be some misunderstanding about my clients. I am a volunteer digital media manager. I AM NEVER COMPENSATED OR PAID. I hope this provides clarity. I planned on adding a page for Zhantra Entertainment a prominent talent agency and other topics I noticed missing from Wikipedia. Smartcake (talk) 16:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You are surely not a digital media manager for free out of the goodness of your heart. Even if you are, you have a strong

conflict of interest that you have thus far failed to disclose. In any event, you are now blocked, please follow the instructions below, you will need to speak to your disruption, unfounded attacks and accusations, and your relationship with your clients. I suggest that you be as open and clear as possible. 331dot (talk) 16:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply

]

Please do not attack other editors. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 15:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong I was threatened by DoubleGrazing multiple times. I did not mean for my response to come off as a personal attack. I apologize for anything inappropriate I did as I am still learning all the backend of Wikipedia and am trying to learn the correct way to contribute. I'm just wanting to contribute and add valuable pages about people or businesses that are not already on Wiki. This has definitely detered me as a user and editor as all I wanted was some help with making my very first article correct Smartcake (talk) 15:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A page you created has been nominated for deletion as an attack page, according to

Do not create pages that attack, threaten, or disparage their subject or any other entity. Attack pages and files are not tolerated by Wikipedia, and users who create or add such material may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 15:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on User talk:Zuleika Lee Castro. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. Theroadislong (talk) 15:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong I was being threatened by a seasoned moderator/editor Username: DoubleGrazing I did not attack anyone and responded to the inappropriate messages I was receiving. That page was created by accident. I am still learning how to contribute to Wikipedia properly. I will watch more tutorials and learn the backend better before doing any more edits other than responding. Smartcake (talk) 15:37, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DoubleGrazing did NOT threaten you, it is you that is making outrageous threats against him. Theroadislong (talk) 15:41, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong I did not threaten anyone. I reported DoubleGrazing after he threatened me multiple times in multiple ways. I will make sure nothing like this happens again. This entire experience has detered me from contributing to Wikipedia until I'm better educated on policies and the platforms user interface. For my ignorance you have my apology. I'm just trying to learn to do this correctly and do not want to violate terms. I use Wikipedia daily. Smartcake (talk) 15:51, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I edited the response. Not sure why the edit is not showing. Genuinely thank you for helping me understand the platform better Smartcake (talk) 15:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Smartcake. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged 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, broadly construed, 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:Smartcake. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Smartcake|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. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Theroadislong (talk) 15:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Theroadislong I do not receive compensation for these edits. Thank you for educating me. I genuinely want to learn how to do this right and literally just want to add valuable missing information to the online encyclopedia like I have been for years Smartcake (talk) 15:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you're casting aspersions on other editors, making personal attacks, and have admitted that you're here to promote your clients, you're clearly

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Canterbury Tail talk 16:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will again advise you that paid editing is not limited to specific payment for edits. If your clients pay you for any form of work for them, that is paid editing. 331dot (talk) 16:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]