Rtm-2000

Welcome!

Hi Rtm-2000, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. Our intro page provides helpful information for new users—please check it out! If you have any questions, you can get help from experienced editors at the Teahouse. Happy editing! Paradoctor (talk) 04:48, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Minor edits

Please familiarize yourself with WP:MINOREDIT. Edits like this one should never be marked as minor. Paradoctor (talk) 04:50, 13 October 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Viveen (October 18)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by DoubleGrazing were:  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 after they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Viveen 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.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Rtm-2000! 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! DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:16, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Viveen

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:Viveen requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from https://viveen.info/info/biography/. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:17, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

I was in the middle of editing the page - I spent three hours yesterday and 2 hours the day before. I had NOT pressed the resubmit button. You have just deleted my work before it is finished. This is madness!!!! What a ridiculous system. Viveen as an artist has be marginalised by a male dominated industry and her work not given the credit it deserves - particularly with N-Trance where the record company and the band leader tried to erase her from history (as she left at the height of their fame and had to bring in people to mime on the videos - I can send you the contracts if you want). You seem to be assisting in the process of suppressing her right to be acknowledged. The Viveen page I am setting up is a page of FACTS not superlatives and all it needs is some time because we all haven't written 200 articles on Wikipedia and so its a learning process. Kindly simmer down, back off and try and have a bit of respect for what i am trying to do here. You even deleted around 12 of the references. Why? Why is the site Discogs so bad? Is it because it is a competitor? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discogs You even list it on your own site - so it cant be that bad. It is a major industry source of information. That's a FACT - its not opinion. So I'm assuming you have no knowledge of the music industry. One of those Discogs pages I referenced has 88 references to Viveens work - songs that she wrote or sung on. The missing tracks are the N-Trance ones because her work has been obscured as detailed above. So again - kindly put the page back to what it was like on my last edit and let me get on with it. I will then come back to you when I am ready to find out if all is good to go. Thank you. Rtm-2000 (talk) 05:12, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Also you have clasiffied the Musicbrainz site as an unreliable source. You obviously don't know that the BBC and other media organisations use Musicbrainz for their source of images and information. These are some of the biggest organisations in the world. If it is good enough for them - why is it not good enough for yourself? Ref https://www.bbc.co.uk/music/brainz/ Rtm-2000 (talk) 05:52, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I don't know who you're having a go at, but I assume it's me, since you're responding to a message (or rather, automated template) signed by me; therefore, I will respond.

Let me try to explain a few things which might help:

The draft has not been deleted, it is still there. It is true that I requested for it to be deleted, since it was almost completely copied from a copyrighted source which is actually against the law, but the administrator who attended to my request, Significa liberdade, declined to do so, and instead chose the much more laborious option of removing the copyrighted material and purging the edit history of the same, in order to save your draft. (I personally think you were lucky, although I expect you don't feel quite the same way.) For that reason, I couldn't restore the draft to its earlier state if I wanted, as the earlier state has been purged from the records. Please understand that we have to abide by the law and remove copyright violations from our servers as soon as they are discovered, and these can and will not be restored.

Regarding the two sources you mention, Discogs and Musicbrainz, Wikipedia has its own policies on reliable sources, and as a rule of thumb, user-generated ones – including Wikipedia itself! – are not considered reliable. This is not my opinion, or that of any individual editor, but based on community consensus stemming from experience and analysis of these matters.

Moving on to how Wikipedia articles should be written, your job as the author of this draft is not to write what you know about the subject, or what you want to tell the world about her, or to right some great wrongs related to her. Your job is merely to summarise, in your own words but without putting any 'spin' or embellishment on things, what independent and reliable secondary sources have said about her, citing each source against the information it has provided. That's it, in a nutshell, and that's all there is to it. I suggest for your next attempt, if there is to be one, you follow this model, and this alone.

Last but by no means least, I have already raised a query about your role and your relationship with the subject, Viveen, but you have so far chosen not to respond to that. I assume (from your user name, and from your edit history including what you have said above) that you represent Viveen's managing agency Real Time Media Ltd, am I right? In that case, you have a conflict of interest in this subject, and more specifically a paid-editing one, which you must disclose clearly and without delay. Please note that such a disclosure is a hard requirement under our terms & conditions, not an optional extra, and failure to do so may result in your user account being blocked. I suggest that you make the necessary disclosure as your very next edit, as instructed in the first section of the thread below, titled 'October 2024'. Thank you.

I hope you will take this advice in the constructive spirit it is offered in, and wish you luck in your editing endeavours. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:28, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Since when has managing an artist and trying to get the correct factual information to the public been a paid endeavour!!! Like I said I need this page restored so that I can continue. How can I get Significa liberdade to do that? Just seems such a waste of erevybody's time this system. As I clearly stated these are all facts that I am writing out and I was in the MIDDLE of rephrasing / adding and editing when Significa liberdade jumped in at destroyed everything!!! The fact that I am infringing on my own copyright is also an absurd concept - but one that would not have mattered once I had finished the page. There is no biased slanted narrative. Its all facts. Rtm-2000 (talk) 06:59, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

I can see that you have regrettably chosen to disregard every point I tried to make, therefore I will give up trying.

You would have a much more fruitful, and less frustrating, experience here if you tried to work with our policies and guidelines rather than against them. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

Managing an artist whose Wikipedia page you are trying to create is a conflict of interest, which " is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia". Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 14:21, 19 October 2024 (UTC)

The facts are the facts!!! Creating content that is truth surely is the aim here. All the info I have added are correct and factual. Rtm-2000 (talk) 09:32, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Managing is not a paid activity. Management had a duty of care to make sure their artists have CORRECT information about their releases - which is not the case as present as Wiki has not given the credits to releases by Viveen Wray on many recordings. Rtm-2000 (talk) 09:34, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Rtm-2000: You do not have to be paid to have a conflict of interest. For example, I would have a conflict of interested if I decided to write an article about my spouse or friend. Please go read Wikipedia's guidelines about conflicts of interest. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:58, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Also going back to this Musicbrainz point where my entries keep on getting either 1) deleted or 2) marked as low quality source. I have taken a look at other artists and Musicbrainz is quoted a lot. Here is just the one example - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Police Please check the bottom of the page and under Authority control databases Musicbrainz is used. So why are the editors on RTM's entries constantly deleting / marking them as mentioned above??? Rtm-2000 (talk) 09:38, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Rtm-2000! There are two points to consider here:

1. Most articles on Wikipedia are far from perfect. For music-related articles the community has deemed high-quality, please review Featured Articles (e.g., David Bowie, The Beatles, or Mariah Carey) and Good Articles (e.g., Johanna Geisler, Blackpink, or Daara J).
2. Although other pages may include sources such as MusicBrainz in the authority control box or in the external links, they should not be used as references. The authority control box and external links are not used to verify information. The important thing to know about MusicBrainz is that it is a user-generated source, and Wikipedia considers such sources to be generally unreliable.

I hope this makes sense. Let me know if you have further questions. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:54, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

Hello Rtm-2000. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Viveen, 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Rtm-2000. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rtm-2000|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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Per this, the artist Viveen (Draft:Viveen) is represented by Real Time Media Ltd. I assume the 'Rtm' in your user name refers to that business? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:58, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

yes correct - thats why I have the user name RTM and my business email. Since when is that non disclosure?? Rtm-2000 (talk) 09:39, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Just by looking at your username, it is not clear to others that you have a conflict of interest. For instead, you could have chosen the username because your name is Randy Thomas Matthews (RTM), and you were born in 2000. The purpose of disclosing your conflict of interest is so everyone who sees your edits, including those who cannot see your email address, knows you have a bias. Please add the {{Paid}} disclosure to your user page. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 18:02, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

All the text was neutral. It was just facts. No spin, no marketing - just facts. I thought that was Wiki's aim. Rtm-2000 (talk) 09:41, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Rtm-2000, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rtm-2000|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:28, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:57, 18 October 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning if you make any further edits without responding to the inquiry you received regarding undisclosed paid editing. DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:06, 23 October 2024 (UTC)

I have replied on this issue. Do I have to repeat myself several times?? Rtm-2000 (talk) 09:30, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

You have not replied with anything clear and unambiguous, and in any case not disclosed in the manner required by our terms and conditions. You must place a clear disclosure on your user page, preferably using the {{paid}} template appropriately filled-in, and/or on the talk page of every article and draft (using the {{Connected contributor (paid)}} template) to which your conflict of interest (COI) applies.

Regarding that last point, I note that you have been editing not only the Viveen draft, but also the published articles Gwen Dickey and Rose Royce (as well as N-Trance, although whether you have a conflict regarding that is not quite so obvious). Because of your COI, you must not do that, and instead need to make edit requests on such articles' talk pages, using the {{Edit COI}} template.

Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:01, 26 October 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Viveen (October 23)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Ktkvtsh 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:Viveen 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.

Ktkvtsh (talk) 05:39, 23 October 2024 (UTC)