Blckbelt

June 2024

Hello, I'm GMH Melbourne. I noticed that you recently removed content from Objecteering without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:10, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

I did mean to edit the page and got some tips from my mentor. I had trouble adding my explanation into the comment box for some reason. Should I start over with the original page? Blckbelt (talk) 02:15, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you can make the edit again but please explain if you can in the edit summary. GMH Melbourne (talk) 02:24, 14 June 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:The WIT Network

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 WIT Network, 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. Safari Scribe^{Edits! Talk!} 16:35, 20 June 2024 (UTC)

COI

You have an obvious conflict of interest and you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, 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:Blckbelt. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Blckbelt|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Also read the following regarding writing an article:

• you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

• Your only ref was a self-written promo for the organisation, consider joining us today. Hardly an independent third-party source.

• The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

1. significant coverage in
2. independent,
3. multiple,
4. reliable,
5. secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

• Your organisation appears to have no headquarters, membership, employees, management structure, funding or expenditure. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts supported by independent sources.

• You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

• your text was a fact-free promo with claims like The organization supports women at all ages and stages of their career journey presented as fact.

• There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
• You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

• your text was largely copied from here marked © Microsoft 2024 and can't be used here for legal reasons.

• not a reason for deletion, but you should use wikilinks, eg Not-for-profit organization

Looking at your user page and your contributions, this doesn't appear to be a promotion-only account, but before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:00, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

More

You said I meant to save it in draft mode, but I must have clicked something that said it was ready for review. Obvious promo and copyright violations will be removed even while in draft space. You said Please - are you able to restore it in draft mode... For legal reasons we don't restore copyright violations (and I note that your own website is marked © 2024 The WIT Network), but in any case your text had little to salvage.

I can see that this all looks a bit harsh, but if you need any help, please let me know Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:50, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Checking your other edits led me to Objecteering, now deleted as blatant spam, so thanks for that Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:16, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

Hi Jim...I am happy to see my edits to the Objecteering article helped! I am excited to be part of this community of editors.

For "The WIT Network" page, this is not my company or my website. I don't have a conflict of interest as I am not part of this organization, receive no compensation from them, and they are not aware I was going to write this article. I do understand what you are saying that the copyright violations get deleted. I had copied sentences into the draft article to use as a basis as I was preparing my thoughts. I understand now that I can't do that. I thought while it was in draft, it was not being reviewed by anyone and that I would have time to collect my research and work the content. I will do that outside of the platform from now on.

I don't take your comments as harsh. I just don't want the title of this article to be blocked forever by my clumsy first step on a new article. I want to help technical organizations get profiled in wikipedia. I was inspired by Jess Wade who wrote many articles for Women in Science and I hoped to do something similar for women in technology. I want to learn and become good at this. I should have learned more about the protocol for a new article before making these mistakes!

Blckbelt (talk) 18:08, 21 June 2024 (UTC)

I won't necessarily see comments here unless you start it with my username, User:Jimfbleak and sign it with four tildes ~~~~ when you post it. That will send me an alert. Although an article title can be protected from creation, that normally only happen after persistent and deliberate disruptive editing.

You've probably realised that writing about a company or organisation is difficult. Outsiders often don't have enough facts, and insiders tend to be too promotional (and often get themselves blocked for not disclosing a COI). To start with, at least, better to stick with biographies, but make sure the women technologists you choose meet our notability criteria as linked above and that you can find independent verifiable sources Jimfbleak - talk to me? 08:56, 22 June 2024 (UTC)

@Jimfbleak

Thanks so much for all your time and feedback. I appreciate it more than you probably realize. I will also take your advice on starg with biographies instead of organisations when I try my hand next at a new article. For now, I'll stick to editing current articles to sharpen my understanding. Have a great week-end.

Blckbelt (talk) 15:33, 22 June 2024 (UTC)