Zsoltnyiri

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 16)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt 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 when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox 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 User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox, 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) 01:58, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Zsoltnyiri! 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) 01:58, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox

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 User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox, 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. — Frayæ (Talk/Spjall) 14:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 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 Theroadislong 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 User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox 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 User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 15:19, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Help me!

Please help me with... with texting my content correctly. Greetings, Zsolt

Zsoltnyiri (talk) 17:32, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

The issue isn't just the wording, though what you wrote was a collection of PR buzzwords. Wikipedia content should be a neutral summary of what reliable third-party sources have reported about the subject. Your lone third-party source wasn't cited for any information about the subject at all. The non-independent source, problematic for that reason alone, only mentioned the ISCM in passing. There's also your conflict of interest, and the lack of disclosure likely means you violated the Terms of Use. In short, don't write about your employer or your work, and if you absolutely have to do so, don't write blatant spam but as neutral an assessment as you can manage, based on third-party sources. Huon (talk) 21:18, 16 September 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (September 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Abelmoschus Esculentus 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 User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox 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 User:Zsoltnyiri/sandbox, 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.

—AE (talk • contributions) 02:02, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

COI

Wikipedia is not social media, nor is it free advertising, however worthy your cause. Please read what follows carefully, because if you keep posting without regard to our rules, you will be blocked from editing at all.

• You have an obvious conflict of interest and you must declare it. Since 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. Since you work 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:Zsoltnyiri. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Zsoltnyiri|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. 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, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the 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.
• 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.

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. Also read Your first article. You must also reply to the COI request above Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:47, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~~~~ You are not banned from creating an article, but you must make the formal COI declaration indicated above and write in accordance with the guidelines I've listed. you are discouraged from writing about a COI topic because their is a real risk that you will not write it in a balanced encyclopaedic way; the same applies to your colleagues. Even if you or your colleagues make a COI declaration, if you do not appear willing or able to write in accordance with the detailed guidelines above, you can still be blocked. I strongly suggest that if you do still intend to write about this topic you do so as a draft at Draft:ViewPoint Model, stick to facts sourced to independent third-party sources, and avoid opinions and WP:OR Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:40, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

You said I am pleased to provide you with an official document as to have one of the claims made verifiable... How can I upload a file where information is treated with the necessary respect for confidentiality? There is no mechanism for uploading files here other than images. Even if there were, you would have to relinquish your copyright, as with images posted here.

What you would need to do is to post the document on your web site with a link here. It would have to be as a reference that anyone can access, so there would be no question of it being "confidential". If it's used to verify a fact, it must be publicly accessible.

You don't say what the nature of the document is, but I'll remind you that company sources are not independent verifiable sources, and will only be accepted for uncontroversial factual information such as the company structure or accounts information. Anything that might be challenged requires a third-party source as described in my initial posting

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 09:25, 25 September 2018 (UTC)

You said With reference to COI, I am the creator of the ViewPointModel, a think model that argues the co-existence of multiple truths and causing often discourse. Even if you do not receive financial compensation, you clearly have a conflict of interest, which you must make clear on your user page. You've also referred to KPMG Australia and ICCPM in Australia, which implies some sort of business arrangements which at the very least need to be clarified, especially as you claim that they are giving you access to confidential documents. You need to clearly state on your user page that you are the creator of VPM, and the exact nature of your relationship with the Australian companies. You haven't tried to conceal your COI, but it needs to be transparent on your user page. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:26, 26 September 2018 (UTC)

Hi, it doesn't matter what documents you send to me, you must have independent third party references as defined above in the article, otherwise there is no way that you can meet our notability criteria, also defined above. An unreferenced block of text like that in your sandbox is likely to be deleted as either non-notable (no third-party refs) promotion (entirely unsupported claims) or original research, which is not permitted. You don't even wikilink to any other pages, such as mathematical modelling. If you are unwilling or unable to write a properly referenced article, it has no chance of survival. It's not a matter of convincing me; any reader must be able to check the references to verify what you say, we can't accept what amounts to an unsourced personal essay.

As it happens, today's featured article is binary search algorithm, which might give you some idea on how to construct and reference a maths-related article. You don't need that detail or level of excellence, but you can't just dump random text here

You have been told repeatedly by myself and Huon what you need to do, but have so far been unwilling or unable to comply. You have been warned more than once of the consequences if you're not seen as even attempting to comply with our rules Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:31, 29 October 2018 (UTC)

I have reverted this edit you made to my talk page. You must not remove comments from someone else's talk page, and in particular you mustn't remove my replies to your comments on my talk page.

I'm sorry if you find the process frustrating, but it's largely because you choose to ignore all the advice you are given. In the first bullet point above, I said you must have proper references, you still have none. In a later bullet point, I said no url links, you have many. I said that you should look at binary search algorithm, which might give you some idea on how to construct and reference; you clearly haven't done so. You don't have to use the fancy reference templates, just <ref>[url description]</ref> for web refs or <ref>[publication details]</ref> for books etc will do, although the article I indicated also has more detailed formatting. For links to Wikipedia article, just use double brackets eg hard systems, not a url or ref. You can pipe these so that they show differently, eg [[Soft systems methodology|soft]] shows as soft Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:23, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

A shorter and simpler article you could look at is Pamela C. Rasmussen Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:27, 30 October 2018 (UTC)

Most of your text is still unreferenced and looks like WP:OR. In your lead you mention three publications, list them in full either as references or in bibliography section (Format examples Tietze, Dieter Thomas; Martens, Jochen; Sun, Yue-Hua; Paeckert, Martin (2008). "Evolutionary history of treecreeper vocalisations(Aves: Certhia)". Organisms, Diversity & Evolution. 8: 305–324. doi:10.1016/j.ode.2008.05.001. and Harrap, Simon; Quinn, David (1996). Tits, Nuthatches and Treecreepers. Christopher Helm. pp. 177–195. ISBN 0-7136-3964-4.)

You have numerous quotations; they must be attributed with proper references or they will be removed as copyright violations. You mention various sources and work studies in the text eg Source HBR 1985... Similarly, another work study was conducted in 2012... they need to be formatted as references

As long as this looks like a personal essay, it won't be accepted. Strip out opinions and stick to referenced facts. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:47, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Zsoltnyiri

A tag has been placed on User:Zsoltnyiri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 13:14, 11 November 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: ViewPoint Model (December 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jovanmilic97 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:ViewPoint Model 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:ViewPoint Model, 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.

Jovanmilic97 (talk) 22:02, 11 December 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: ViewPoint Model (April 8)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CAPTAIN MEDUSA 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:ViewPoint Model 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:ViewPoint Model, 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 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, 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.

___CAPTAIN MEDUSAtalk 12:41, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Strong conflict of interest

Hi, per your own declaration at Special:Diff/861306576, you appear to have a strong conflict of interest (despite denying having one) that leads to issues pointed out in the declining comments above.

Editors with a COI are sometimes unaware of whether or how much it has influenced their editing. If COI editing causes disruption, an administrator may opt to place blocks on the involved accounts.

Wikipedia is not here to tell the world about your noble cause.

~ ToBeFree (talk) 21:17, 8 April 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Zsoltnyiri

A tag has been placed on User:Zsoltnyiri requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section U5 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to consist of writings, information, discussions, and/or activities not closely related to Wikipedia's goals. Please note that Wikipedia is not a free web hosting service. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such pages may be deleted at any time.

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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Theroadislong (talk) 07:40, 9 April 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: ViewPoint Model (May 14)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by AngusWOOF 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 when they have been resolved.

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

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 19:10, 14 May 2019 (UTC)

Draft:ViewPoint Model concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:ViewPoint Model, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 21:40, 19 October 2019 (UTC)