AGW8899

Your submission at Articles for creation: The Queer Trans Project (August 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 331dot was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:The Queer Trans Project 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.

331dot (talk) 06:02, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AGW8899! 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! 331dot (talk) 06:02, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023

Hello AGW8899. 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 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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely 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:AGW8899. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AGW8899|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. 331dot (talk) 06:03, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, I am not a paid employee. I am a volunteer. Thanks for the edits and advice. AGW8899 (talk) 06:23, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

In fact, no one is paid at QTP or any volunteers AGW8899 (talk) 06:24, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

If you volunteer with the intention of putting your work with the organization on a resume, that counts as paid editing as you are compensated with the experience of the work in order to obtain future work. If you don't intend to do that, you're all set. In that case you will need to read and comply with the conflict of interest policy to declare an unpaid conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 06:28, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

ok , no problem. thank you AGW8899 (talk) 06:29, 22 August 2023 (UTC) 06:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Sorry, this is my first time doing this. AGW8899 (talk) 06:38, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

So this is the paid disclosure for article talk pages, if you just want to declare an unpaid COI, see WP:COI. 331dot (talk) 06:55, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Done! Again thank you for pactience. I am in the web IRC chat also getting feedback and asking questions. One concern was more rigourous sourcing, one example quoting "Fueled by a deep commitment to inclusivity and equality" - you need to find a place where someone has said that, attribute it to them, and cite a source saying that said that. Do you agree with this? Should I take out a lot of the "fluff" and use simple language to not have to source opinions? AGW8899 (talk) 07:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Wikipedia articles must be written very dry, without embellishment or promotional language, and should primarily summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Our experience is that organization representatives are usually too close to the organization to be able to write about it as is required. We don't want to know what the organization says about itself, we want to know what others wholly unconnected with it choose to say about it. See WP:NOBLE. What are your three absolute best independent sources? 331dot (talk) 10:11, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:The Queer Trans Project

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:The Queer Trans Project, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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 "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 deleted 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. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 09:14, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

I am requesting a third opinion and conflict of interest AGW8899 (talk) 09:19, 22 August 2023 (UTC)

Please read Help:Your first article thoroughly. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:05, 22 August 2023 (UTC)