Lukeweaver95

Welcome!

Hello, Lukeweaver95, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was User:Lukeweaver95/sandbox, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Best practices for editors with close associations
• 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! Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:03, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Drm310,

Thank you for your message. The article you mention is in fact about the organisation I am employed by. I drafted the article with the intention of remaining neutral, but it would be great if you could help me by proofreading and editing to ensure it meets the guidelines and is published, if that is okay?

The account is only used by myself and my username does not relate to the organisation in any way. Additionally, I am not receiving compensation for writing the writing, so hopefully that means I fall within Wikipedia guidelines.

Again, thank you for you message and I look forward to becoming a part of the community.

Lukeweaver95 (talk) 14:30, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Lukeweaver95, there are a few important points to cover here.

1. Writing about your employer is enough for you to be considered a paid editor, per this part of the paid editing disclosure policy: "Users who are compensated for any publicity efforts related to the subject of their Wikipedia contributions are deemed to be paid editors, regardless of whether they were compensated specifically to edit Wikipedia." Therefore, you must make the required disclosures in the manner described by this policy.
2. A company isn't entitled to have an article on Wikipedia just because it exists. All topics on Wikipedia must be deemed notable to be considered worthy of inclusion. To determine if a topic is notable, we need to see evidence of significant coverage from multiple reliable sources that are independent of the topic. In the case of companies, the general notability criteria have been refined into these notability criteria specific to companies.
3. Reliable sources are defined as sources with an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. This heavily favours mainstream news media, academic press, and reputable publishers of books, magazines and newspapers. Trade publications, of which you have used at least two as sources, are often promotional in nature and so their reliability must be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
4. Independent sources are sources that have no personal, political or financial interest in the subject being discussed. Your Ringcentral source would not be considered independent as your company is their customer, and therefore they have a financial interest which impairs their objectivity.
5. All articles must be written from a plainly factual and neutral point of view. Language like "providing outstanding customer services", "customer focused solutions" and "bring its customers the best energy solutions available" are inherently praiseworthy statements that not encyclopedic. That is why we discourage editors with a conflict of interest from writing about topics where they have a personal or professional connection. Even well-intentioned editors are often incapable of recognizing that their writing has a biased tone.

--Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:03, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Drm310,

Thank you for your response.

I have looked through my sandbox draft and believe that I have now removed any language and phrases that do not conform to the Wikipedia's policies as well as removing the Ring Central citation.

Do you think the remaining source list incorporates enough neutral sources to help get the page published and whether the updated content conforms to guidelines?

Lukeweaver95 (talk) 09:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Before you do anything further, please make use of the {{paid}} template on your userpage (User:Lukeweaver95). Your disclosure as a paid editor is mandatory, and that location is the most visible place for it to exist.

I think the bit about "Valda Energy's senior team have over 20 years of experience ..." could be cut, because it sounds like advertising for potential customers rather than something of encyclopedic value. Other than that, it looks better than before.

I will add a template to the top of the sandbox that will allow you to submit it for review. Article reviewers might move your content to the draft article space. so don't be alarmed if that happens. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Valda Energy Limited (September 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 RPSkokie 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:Valda Energy Limited 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.

RPSkokie (talk) 17:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Lukeweaver95! 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! RPSkokie (talk) 17:11, 22 September 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Valda Energy Limited (September 26)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Loksmythe were: 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:Valda Energy Limited 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.

Loksmythe (talk) 13:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Valda Energy Limited

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:Valda Energy Limited, 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. Loksmythe (talk) 13:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

Reply

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, you must follow the guidance below:

• 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
• 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.

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

Also note that "Limited" shouldn't be part of your title, and that the lead section should not have a heading. Other heading should be in sentence case. You should start a new draft from scratch

Everything you write must be referenced and factual, not promo like centre of energy expertise and market insight, whose mission is to transform the world's energy systems for a zero-carbon future. or are the most secure and safest smart meter available. Your company seems to have no employees, turnover or profits, or at least the text fails to say anything about them.

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? 15:06, 11 October 2022 (UTC)

October 2022

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Bbb23 (talk) 12:22, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Bbb23,

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Lukeweaver95 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I'm wondering why you have blocked me indefinitely? I have looked at the sock puppetry page linked in the block notice and don't believe I have violated any of these. Can you please clarify? Lukeweaver95 (talk) 14:18, 13 October 2022 (UTC)

Decline reason:

It's pretty clear that you have some sort of relation with another account that has attempted to edit about the same subject as you. I don't know if it's sock puppetry or meat puppetry, but the end result is the same. 331dot (talk) 09:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

---

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.