Engineersone88

Emear McGeown

Welcome!

Hello, EimearMcGeown, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you created or edited was Draft:Emear McGeown, which appears to be an article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is a common mistake made by new Wikipedians—as this is an encyclopedia, we wouldn't expect to have an article about every contributor. Your user page, however, is a great place to write about yourself, making sure to stay within user page guidelines. Just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit it normally.

The page you created about yourself may well be deleted from the encyclopedia. If it is deleted and you wish to retrieve its contents, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page. If your contributions to an existing article about yourself are undone and you wish to add to it, please propose the changes on its talk page.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! GPL93 (talk) 02:28, 13 May 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eimear McGeown (August 12)

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

Sionk (talk) 22:04, 12 August 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE: I originally named the article 'EimearMcGeown because this is who the article relates to? I thought that would be appropriate. There is a copyright issue. and I do not understand how rejecting based on this aspect is in good faith? I have spent many months writing this article and learning about wiki and how to code but I am worried now that it was all for nothing. There is no conflict of interest. This is all my work.

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eimear McGeown (December 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Eimear McGeown may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Yitz (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Engineersone88! 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! Yitz (talk) 17:27, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE: This article is 100% my own work, words and structure. I have written this article 100% factual in a neautral tone. I have been respectful and honest. It is absolutely heart breaking when a reviewer responds with 'copywright' infrigement and given absolutely no grounds for this comment. It has taken me a long time to learn how to code for this article and it is important for me to keep the language conscise and basic in structure. Eimear McGeowen has an extensive body of work that can be found all over the internet. I also play the flute and have a personal interest but there is no conflict of interest whatso ever. Please be specific if there is anything wrong that I am doing.

December 2021

Hello Engineersone88. 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:Engineersone88. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Engineersone88|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. bonadea contributions talk 21:26, 14 December 2021 (UTC) RESPONSE:  : I am not being compensated for my efforts. I also play the irish flute and I have put many hours of work into this article. And I am doing everything possible to stick within the guidlines and this article is taking me a very long time. Only to have reviewers submit rejections based on no factual information. The only conflict of interest here are the reviewers trying to generate work for themselves. If I knew Wikipedia was this difficult with reviewers rejecting articles with no factual basis I would never have bothered to learn how to write an article in the first place. What is your qualification?

Thank you for your response. It's really important to sign your talk page comments so that they are easier to attribute to you. Its explained in the last para of the welcome message at the head of the page.

Wikipedia now understand that you are not paid to edit. Good. Thank you. We will set the comments about reviewers im that response aside. You may wish to redact them. They are due to a misunderstanding. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 00:10, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 22:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. bonadea contributions talk 23:26, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eimear McGeown (December 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted because it included copyrighted content, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

• Draft:Eimear McGeown may be deleted at any time unless the copied text is removed. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page. or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

bonadea contributions talk 21:38, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE: This article is 100% my own work, words and structure. Please show me the copywrited material ? I have written this article 100% factual in a neautral tone. I have been respectful and honest. My partner mentioned the other day that she saw a website that appeared to have copy and pasted my article (while it was in review in publish mode) on one of the festival websites. There is nothing I can do about this. The industry is more inclined to copy and past wikipedia than the other way around surely? It has taken me a long time to learn how to code for this article and it is important for me to keep the language conscise and basic in structure because I am not an expert at coding. Eimear McGeowen has an extensive portfolio of work including performace for the Queen of England (Elizabeth 2nd.) . I also play the flute and have a personal interest but there is no conflict of interest whatso ever. Please be specific if there is anything wrong with my article because I am a qualified engineer and I do not understand where I am going wrong.

AfC notification: Draft:Eimear McGeown has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Eimear McGeown. Thanks! bonadea contributions talk 22:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

HELP: I dont know what do do? I have not copy and pasted any material from anywhere. This is all my own work and I have spent many months writing this article. I have asked questions to the reviewer why they have rejected this article with no factual basis. I am respectful and honest and this is working against me. I dont know what to do.

Your submission at Articles for creation

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. 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 the submission 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 the submission, 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, 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.

Engineersone88 (talk) 23:02, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I have done my very best to address concerns. I hope by writing this here I am notifying you properly. Tristan

I can see that you are upset

Draft:Eimear McGeown is close to being acceptable. When we review drafts we run them against a copyright violation checking tool. The output is here: https://copyvios.toolforge.org/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Draft%3AEimear_McGeown

It can be tweaked in a number of ways, but it identifies areas that it is certain appear in the article (or draft) and a source.

Now, some things. like the names of orchestras, names of pieces played, etc, those are what they are. It is the other items that need to be 100% in one's own words.

Yes, you have learned a new skill. Your are almost there. It's really not worth arguing with a reviewer. Do open constructive dialogue, yes, but try very hard not to argue. Wikipedia is bigger than all of us

There are problems with the files uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, though. THey have been nominated for deletion by me because they appear at https://www.eimearmcgeown.com with a full copyright statment at the foot. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:09, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Above all, do not give up. The most experienced, the best editors here, all of us started with tearing our hair out over things like this. It's a great hobby. The work you've put in is palpable. It just needs tweaking Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, and use ~~~~ to sign things on forums and talk pages. IT transforms to your signature automagically Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:13, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I am certain that McGeown meets our notability criteria. I am equally certain that one last push by you will remove any possible thoughts of copyright issues. I am certain that the draft is close to acceptance. I really want to see your work see the full light of day.

Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. So, even though the pill is hard to swallow, reviewers have protected the draft from summary deletion were it to go into main article space too soon.

And yes, we are all amateurs, unpaid volunteers. We just have a hobby we find rewarding. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

I ran this query and it shows text identical to her own web site. Now, as you can see, some of the direct hits are inevitable and excusable. Others are less excusable. Solving this is pedantic work, but I know you can do it Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:35, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE: Thankyou your advice really helps. I really appreciatte your advice and not just a another slap on the face for no reason. I will look carefully at the words again to see where the word need changing because maybe the website has used the words from my draft. I will revert . Thankyou. I have hopefully addressed the issue for the two images. I have a email from Eimear's team with permission to use the images because It was me whom took the photos and originally sent them to her team after the events. Engineersone88

There is still some work to do on Wikimedia Commons. As you will see from my actions there following your explanation I have advised you of the route forwards there, and also bought you sufficient tie to produce confidentially the proofs there that you need to.

Commons is a wholly separate wite, with very stringent rules on copyright. It will protect your copyright properly yet aggressively. That is a good thing, though it can feel imposing.

The thing to do now is to relax. There is absolutely no deadline. Work quietly, calmly, and diligently. Do not submit until ready, and use the copyright violation tool as your guide. Its one of the gadgets you can turn on for yoursef in your preferences area Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:51, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

Oh, I know I probably do not to need to say this, but please try hard in any correspondence to or about other editors to be scrupulous in avoiding anything that could be interpreted as offensive, however frustrated you are. Your righteous indignation resulted in a couple of warnings ^^^^ up there a bit. Trust me, you don't want any more of those. If upset, walk away form Wikipedia for a good few minutes. Posting under stress is a recipe for disaster (loss of editing privileges). I've seen it more often than I care to that a frustrated, often new, editor gets blocked for righteous indignation. Please don't let that happen to you. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 23:59, 14 December 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE: Thankyou for all your help. I don't know how I would have recieved the advice if it wasnt for you. I dont know where the warnings are and I dont believe i have done anything to deserve them. I have been respectful and honest in everything that i write. If reviewers are going to give me warnings because i need help and asking questions then there is not much i can do about it and just keep trying my best. Thankyou you are very helpful.

Head up to the section "December 2021" at the foot. But that is now the past. Please sign your posts. (Pretty please?). four tilde characters will turn into a date and time stamped signature.

The issue was, I think, the way you started out, hackles up. all guns blazing. That, too, is in the past. Fokk here are just folk. We have all the deficiencies that ordinrary folk so. Some of us are patient, kind. Some are easy to rile. And the written word is a surprisingly poor communications medium because we cannot hear the tone of voice, nor see the eyes, of the person we communivate with. Misunderstandings are far too easy in this medium. Me? Infinite patience. I was new here, long ago. I've made mistakes, and still do. The thing that shows who we are is how we handle ourselves when under stress.

With luck, and with your personal determination and mettle, you have put the past behind you. It was, as I say, in the past.

Moving forward, there is no rush. Let me know when you think you are ready, before you submit for review, and I'll take a look. Not sure how to reach me? Click "Talk to me" im my signature.

Sorry for all my typos. I am an incompetent typist! Fiddle^Timtrent [[User talk:Timtrent|Faddle^Talk to me

What I did today

I created sections and moved stuff around, to be in a format common to biography articles. Before resubmitting, either declare on your Talk page that you have no personal nor professional connection to EM, or else state on your User page the exact nature of your connection. See WP:COI for explanation of why this is required. David notMD (talk) 13:47, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

RESPONSE:: @Bonadea I have no personal or professional connection to Eimear McGeown. I have attended a number of events as a fellow amateur fluatist (where you will find evidence of me playing in a number of youtube videos) where she has played and taken several photos which I sent to her agency once using the contact email on her website which it apears she now uses on her website. It appears her website has been updated since I last saw it late last year and after reading the blurb it does appear to me that whoever has made her website has copy and pasted some sentences from my wiki article while it is in review. I have absolutely no conflict of interest at all and I am not being paid for anything. I just wanted to learn a new skill. Not being allowed to write this article would be like saying I can't write an article about the Pope if I was a catholic or something.

@David notMD @David notMD (talk) if you wrote the paragraph above thankyou so much for helping me out. I am slowly getting better at writing in wiki code and there is a lot of important guidelines and ways to write something which is very challanging. @Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to meFiddle Faddle has helped me alot and although I am learning quickly that wiki reviews is not a gentle place there seems to be some incredible hobby reviewers who find the time to do this for people. just because they want to. that is really good. Engineersone88 (talk) 21:25, 15 December 2021 (UTC) @David notMD @Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to meFiddle Faddle Ohhhhhhhhhh I just saw what you did with the headings!!!! That looks really great and proffessional!! That reads much better... I wasnt going to risk putting those headings and just kept things simple and basic for my first go... probably took you 2 seconds though...hahahaha thankyou though. Appreciatted. Hope it didn't take too long.

Also fixed some of the refs, as URLs are not the best. You could model fixing the others on what I did. A suggestion - Create the refs in your Sandbox until everything is right, then copy/paste into the article. David notMD (talk) 23:35, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

As for who copied what, a common occurance is that a website copies Wikipedia content without attribution, and then a copyright search on the Wikipedia article identifies an overlap in wording. This can usually be resolved by checking creation dates. Far less often, but not impossible, is a website copying content from a Wikipedia draft, the reason being that the draft would not be found via a search engine (Google, others) search on the topic. David notMD (talk) 23:43, 15 December 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you are happy editing what you have, keep going and edit, obviously with care.

If you choose to use thsi as great experience at not getting it right, and want to start again, look at the process contained in this essay. It's one of many essays on creating articles. The process says simply to start with references. It's worth a look whether you restart or edit.

You've probably worked out that we all wish you well, and wish your work to come to an excellent outcome. We're a tough audience, and a fair one. Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 09:32, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

Faddle^Talk to meFaddle^Talk to meDavid notMDBonadea Ok i'll continue plugging away at it over christmas to try and re-word some of the sentences and think of some other describing words to keep Bondea happy because I can see the link between my article and her biography which i think was cheeckly been taken from my article because ive taken ages with it. . @Bondea: If an arrangement has been created which is not so much melodic music but just just little riffs for certain effects in movies like lord of the rings the best word to describe this is filmic or cinematic etc so im still happy with that ill change few words. I could look at any number of other articles and academicly pounce on everything I think is wrong but i understand you are just keeping wiki safe and free from people just uploading nonsence so wiki probably needs people like you even if your just challanging me on my use of casual words because thats all you can see so thankyou but please stop saying i am in copyright violations because im trying to fix it . I just want to get my first article over the line. Ive been progressively adding to it when I have time and its been a draft for months. Everytime i learn something I have to go to another page and read it in wiki and who knew tindles meant swiggly lines .... but i feel that the basics are almost there...thankyou. ill wait for the pictures to be approved. reword some sentences and then re-submit over christams break. Engineersone88 (talk) 16:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)

February 2022

UPDATE: Faddle^Talk to me Faddle^Talk to meDavid notMDBonadea I just wanted to touch base with you guys (or girls ) that I have re adjusted various information in the article and have submitted all the photos to the email Permissions - Wikimedia Commons <permissions-commons@wikimedia.org>. I am assuming i will recieve an email back saying they have been approved and uploaded shortly. What about this talk page. What happens to this talk page after I resubmit? Is this talk page public for everyone to see? Once I know for certain the photos I took are ok for wiki use I will resubmit my article. Engineersone88 (talk) 15:39, 16 February 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Faddle^Talk to me Faddle^Talk to meDavid notMDBonadea Got an email back to say that I can submit the atricle while the photos still progress. So Ill submit agian now. Fingers crossed. Engineersone88 (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Created a section for Feb 2022. Images do not figure into determining notability. Those can be added if the draft is expected. In answer to your question, YOUR Talk page is yours to do with what you will, including deleting content. Some people archive instead. The ARTICLE's Talk page must be left as is. If the draft is accepted, the Reviewer will delete all those comments and any mention of past Declines. David notMD (talk) 17:40, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much David. Really appreciatted. David notMD (talk) Engineersone88 (talk) 18:11, 18 February 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eimear McGeown has been accepted

Eimear McGeown, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Sionk (talk) 22:53, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

WE DID IT Thankyou so much everybody in helping me. I really appreciatte it!! my first article. !!! Faddle^Talk to me Faddle^Talk to meDavid notMDBonadea