BBCMDocu

Your submission at Articles for creation: Britain's Big Cat Mystery (August 9)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Eagleash 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Britain's Big Cat Mystery 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 Draft:Britain's Big Cat Mystery, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

Eagleash (talk) 22:42, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Hello, BBCMDocu! 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! Eagleash (talk) 22:42, 9 August 2020 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, BBCMDocu. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 06:20, 10 August 2020 (UTC)

I do not believe I have a conflict of interests. I am learning how to create with Wikipedia and this page is part of my learning. BBCMDocu (talk) 11:34, 12 August 2020 (UTC)

Deletion nomination

Hi, I saw that you nominated your draft for deletion. I wanted to ask if you're sure about this. You can absolutely have it deleted if you want, but you can also leave the draft up and continue to work on it. Yes, you do have a clear conflict of interest but you are going about this the right way in that you are trying to create the article via the Articles for Creation process and you seem to be making a good faith attempt to stay within the guidelines in that you've tried to improve the draft since it was initially declined.

I imagine that it's a bit of a big learning curve when it comes to editing Wikipedia, as it certainly was for me when I first started editing! To that end I think it would be good for you to review these training modules (created for students, but still great resources for anyone interested in editing) and these videos on YouTube about editing with Visual Editor.

I'm going to review the draft - I've removed the deletion template for now but you can absolutely replace it if you wish. If I decline it, I'll make sure to leave detailed notes on what you can do to improve the draft if you wish to continue. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:10, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Yes please, please delete BBCMDocu (talk) 10:30, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Britain's Big Cat Mystery (August 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by ReaderofthePack 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Britain's Big Cat Mystery 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 Draft:Britain's Big Cat Mystery, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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.

ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Notes

Hi! Here are some notes:

• This needed a synopsis that set out what the documentary is to cover. I was able to cobble one together, but it's important to keep in mind that people coming into the draft/article may not be aware of the big cats theory and as such, the synopsis will give them an idea of what the movie will be about.

• Looking at the sourcing, it looks like three of the links went to the same news story. Keep in mind that even though it may be published in different locations, a source will still only be seen as a single source since it's the same news article written by the same person, just in different sites.

• Be extremely cautious of sourcing, as not all sources are seen as reliable on Wikipedia. The sourcing has to be independent of the film, its creators, and anyone affiliated by them (ie, friends, family, colleagues, etc) and it must be in a place Wikipedia would see as reliable. Since this documentary is about something that is often described as a fringe theory, it is very important to ensure that the sourcing is reliable. You can read more about this here. One of the biggest hurdles so far will be that it's more difficult for anything considered "fringe" to gain attention from places often seen as reliable and not all of the places that cover content like this are seen as reliable enough for Wikipedia's purposes.

• Also be extremely cautious of film festivals and awards, as most aren't considered to be noteworthy on Wikipedia. The ones that would give notability are typically the ones that are extremely highly selective (like Cannes) and often only hold one awards ceremony for the year. The ones that are mentioned in the article aren't ones that would be considered notability giving on Wikipedia. Be careful in general with awards places as some of the ones out there are profit mills. For example, they make it seem like it's exclusive but actually give just about everyone who applies an award - and may even charge an arm and a leg for the actual award or symbol. Paying an entry fee doesn't automatically mean that something is a scam, but it's always good to google the award/festival/organization title and the words scam or vanity award to make sure that it's legit.

Right now it looks like the biggest hurdle hobbling the film article is that there just aren't enough reliable sources. This is honestly a very common issue that most films run into, which can be very frustrating. My recommendation would be to just continue to slowly work on the draft and wait for the official release. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 08:51, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:BBCMDocu/sandbox

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:BBCMDocu/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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. --Finngall ^talk 18:31, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Britain's Big Cat Mystery (August 13)

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:  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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Britain's Big Cat Mystery 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 Draft:Britain's Big Cat Mystery, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, 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) 18:48, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

Paid editing?

Hello BBCMDocu. 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:BBCMDocu. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=BBCMDocu|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) 18:50, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

I am not doing this for payment, nor would I like payment. I am learning Wiki and a fan of this project is all. Thank you for interest but I will not accept payment or employment at Wikipedia. BBCMDocu (talk) 18:57, 13 August 2020 (UTC)

August 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy or request a change of username.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. Additionally, if your contributions to Wikipedia form all or part of work for which you are, or expect to be, paid, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

Please also note that you are permitted to use a username that contains the name of a company or organization if it identifies you individually, such as "Sara Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", or "FoobarFan87".

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text

{{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}

at the bottom of your talk page. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names.

 Thank you. ~Swarm~ ^{sting} 00:04, 14 August 2020 (UTC)

Nomination of Britain's Big Cat Mystery for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Britain's Big Cat Mystery is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Britain's Big Cat Mystery until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 21:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)