Jacritho

I do some freelance writing; clients on whose behalf I have edited are disclosed below.

Welcome

Hello, Jacritho, and Welcome to Wikipedia!   

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

---

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

• Table of contents / Department directory

• The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)
• The Signpost, our newspaper

Need help?

• Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
• Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
• Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

• Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
• The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
• Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

• Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

• Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

• Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
• If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Jacritho, good luck, and have fun. — Newslinger talk 17:26, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jack Depp (July 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 Dan arndt 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:Jack Depp 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:Jack Depp, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 05:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Jacritho! 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! Dan arndt (talk) 05:18, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

WP:PAID

You must read and follow this. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 13:39, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

Mandatory paid editing disclosure

It appears that you are editing on behalf of Trifecta Pharmaceuticals. Thanks for working via the AfC process instead of editing directly. Greatly appreciated. But please see the note below.

• 

  Hello Jacritho. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Jacritho. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Jacritho|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message.

The template can be hard to work with - if you prefer you can just reply here, and I will help you with the disclosure process, and I can provide some further guidance with respect to the content and behavior policies and guidelines here, which take some time to learn. Jytdog (talk) 14:06, 9 July 2018 (UTC)

moved reply here, that was left on my talk page in this diff Jytdog (talk) 19:48, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog,

Thanks for your feedback on my talk page. I am new to wikipedia but keen to become useful as an editor and article writer. I've had one celebrity-related article rejected so might stick to learning the editing ropes for now :) I have completed a paid disclosure and posted it on my talk page and although my relationship with the company is very distant/informal, I want to be as transparent as possible, so (if you have time) please let me know if I've done this correctly. I'm genuinely interested in the topics I have written on so far and am seeking to impart information, not be promotional. All my research is my own and content/information has not been proposed by any company or individual. I respect your opinion on my articles either way. Apologies for the long note and have a great weekend. J Jacritho (talk) 04:19, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Not too long! Thanks for replying. Would you please clarify the relationship between yourself and Trifecta? (for example, are you a freelancer, or do you work for an agency that Trifecta hired?) Thanks. Please do reply here, to keep this all together. Jytdog (talk) 19:56, 14 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog, I work as a freelancer and have been assisting Trifecta with basic communications tasks such as proof reading presentations and re-writing copy as needed for a couple of months. I haven't met anyone in the company or spoken to them besides through email. I have a personal interest in healthcare and have worked as a communications/investor relations consultant for healthcare and biotech companies for more than a decade. Trifecta's products piqued my interest and I tried to put together some well-researched and objective pages about a couple of their products (you may argue it's not possible for me to do that, but I really had very limited knowledge of these products and spent a lot of time searching for sources to support the information in the articles). I do get paid a nominal amount by the company for my work, but I mainly do it for my own interest, not financial gain (I am at home with three small children LOL). I'm happy to be guided by you on this matter and really appreciate you taking the time to advise me. I can see from your page how busy you are. Many thanks, J Jacritho (talk) 04:26, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for replying! Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and so on, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And you already have this part down, but at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit (you don't need to set the signature off with a new paragraph btw). That is all how we know who said what to whom and when and can read threads easily.

Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).

I know this is unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog (talk) 15:05, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

OK now to the substance. Several things:

Would you please clarify if the article on Jack Depp was a freelance gig as well?

It would be helpful to add in plain text to your userpage, "I do some freelance writing; clients on whose behalf I have edited are disclosed below." or the like. This makes it clear that you are not an employee of Trifecta.

While it hear it that you wrote the pages out of personal interest, you also make it clear that you are paid for it, and that is what matters.

There is a more to say (a bit more orientation about paid editing, then some orientation about editing WP generally, then some about editing about health and medicine in particular, a field that has its own particularities even within the already-strange world of WP.

I work a lot on content about biotech companies (as well as health and medicine) and our content on companies needs a lot of work, aimed at generating content that helps people learn about the business and not just generating directory entries. I would be happy to discuss that too! But bit by bit.. Jytdog (talk) 15:16, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog, Thanks for your note and thanks for the instructions on talk etiquette. Don't want to be considered rude! Regarding the Jack Depp article, no I did not receive any payment for this, I just thought it may be of interest having recently read the Rolling Stone article on Johnny Depp.

I fully accept the reason for rejection (notability is not inherited) and I'm sure that's why a page did not already exist for him :) Not paid though.

I have made your recommended change to my user page so it's clear that I am a freelancer. Thanks for your advice on this.

It's interesting we have similar professional backgrounds/interests. I would love to be a useful editing resource in future and will work on fine tuning my skills. Many thanks again, J Jacritho (talk) 02:02, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. So you should still list the articles you worked on for pay, as well as well as the client. To save us time, I will just put them there. (Usually editing someone's userpage is forbidden and please do feel free to revert, but I am just trying to get through this bit...) I will post the "nuts and bolts" about what you should do as a paid editor below.. it is too long to put here. Jytdog (talk) 17:05, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: TRIORAL rehydration salts (July 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Bearcat 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:TRIORAL rehydration salts 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:TRIORAL rehydration salts, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Bearcat (talk) 17:18, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

Hi Bearcat, just a quick note to say thank you for reviewing the page and for your feedback. Many thanks, J. Jacritho (talk) 16:24, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Nuts and bolts

Thanks again for being transparent and working within the conflict of interest management process.

To finish the disclosure piece, I have added the disclosure locally, at the talk page of the two drafts, here and here.

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask of editors who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to

(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and

(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section on the talk page, put the proposed content there formatted just as you would if you were adding it directly to the article, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) place the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review. In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once. Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example. This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (There are good faith paid editors here, who have signed and follow the Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, and there are "black hat" paid editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts on behalf of a client (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page, with disclosure.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work in WP on behalf of clients? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 17:12, 17 July 2018 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to share all of this with me. I've spent some time reviewing it and agree to learn and follow the policies and guidelines outlined. People have been very generous with their time and explanations so far, so if I have any questions I'm sure I can easily get answers :) Many thanks again, J Jacritho (talk) 19:05, 20 July 2018 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Mayinglong ointment has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Mayinglong ointment. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 02:37, 5 August 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mayinglong ointment (August 7)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Newslinger 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:Mayinglong ointment 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:Mayinglong ointment, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
• You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Newslinger talk 17:25, 7 August 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Jack Depp

Hello, Jacritho. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Jack Depp".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Dolotta (talk) 14:13, 11 January 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:TRIORAL rehydration salts

Hello, Jacritho. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "TRIORAL rehydration salts".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 06:36, 18 January 2019 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Mayinglong ointment

Hello, Jacritho. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Mayinglong ointment".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. JMHamo (talk) 19:29, 8 February 2019 (UTC)