User talk:MaryGaulke/Archive 2

This is an archive of past discussions with User:MaryGaulke. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

ArbCom 2019 election voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:17, 19 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Pan-Mass Challenge has been accepted

Pan-Mass Challenge, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

— Sagotreespirit (^talk) 14:06, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Billy Starr (November 26)

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

— Sagotreespirit (^talk) 12:19, 26 November 2019 (UTC)

Paid editing disclosure

Hi MaryGaulke,

Whilst you seem to have made a good-will attempt to disclose your conflicts of interest on your user talkpage, the disclosures you have made are not sufficient under Wikipedia's paid editing policy. Specifically, for each and every article where you have received or expect to receive payment, directly or indirectly, for your edits, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation - who paid you, who requested the edits, and who brokered the transaction. It would also be helpful for users reviewing your edits if you added internal links to the affected articles as a courtesy. Wikilinks are not required by Wikipedia's policies, but correct disclosure is mandatory. Yunshui ^雲_水 09:10, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

@Yunshui: Hi, thanks for your message! To clarify, would you like me to break out on my user page which COIs are for clients with me personally vs. which are with my employer? I do also specify this in the {{Connected contributor (paid)}} template I place on each affected talk page. Thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 18:47, 4 December 2019 (UTC)

I found my way here from Calvin Cheng; you hadn't posted a talkpage template there so I'd assumed you weren't doing that, but I see you have used them elsewhere. The disclosure you made at Talk:Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Kansas City is a good example of how to go about making a talkpage disclosure correctly, and that's generally considered to be adequate disclosure, as long as you remember to do it... Thank you for adding the wikilinks to your userpage, that's a big improvement. Whilst you're not obligated to separate out your list of articles, you do still need to disclose who is paying you (whether it is your agency or the article subject directly); a segregated list would be a fairly easy way to do that, or you can continue to do so on article talkpages if that is your preference. You only need to list those articles which you have actually edited (or requested edits for), however. Yunshui ^雲_水 08:47, 5 December 2019 (UTC)

Thanks! I seem to have just forgotten the template on Calvin Cheng's talk page, but I assure you that's my standard procedure. I've added it now. I generally add a client to my user page when I begin drafting content for them, even if it's just in my sandbox. Not all clients make it past that stage, which is why there's an occasional discrepancy. Mary Gaulke (talk) 20:07, 6 December 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Mike Sievert has been accepted

Mike Sievert, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

DGG ( talk ) 09:28, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Billy Starr (January 8)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by DGG were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: This is an advertisement

DGG ( talk ) 05:09, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MaryGaulke! 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! DGG ( talk ) 05:09, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Edifecs (January 8)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by DGG was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

DGG ( talk ) 06:17, 8 January 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Hearsay Systems logo 2017.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Hearsay Systems logo 2017.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:39, 22 January 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Druva has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Druva. Thanks! ~Kvng (talk) 13:54, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

@Kvng: Thank you! Replied at Draft talk:Druva. Mary Gaulke (talk) 04:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Druva has been accepted

Druva, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. If your account is more than four days old and you have made at least 10 edits you can 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.
• If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

~Kvng (talk) 14:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Guidehouse (May 1)

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

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

-- RoySmith (talk) 13:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MaryGaulke! 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! -- RoySmith (talk) 13:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Edifecs concern

Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Edifecs, 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) 01:21, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Nacha logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Nacha logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:04, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. gobonobo ^+ ^c 11:52, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Billy Starr concern

Hi there, I'm MDanielsBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Billy Starr, 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. MDanielsBot (talk) 01:22, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Greg Asner has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Greg Asner. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 02:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Greg Asner has been accepted

Greg Asner, 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

DGG ( talk ) 02:41, 6 September 2020 (UTC)

Ric Edelman COI

Hi Mary, I've responded to the COI request on the talk page. I think it looks good and supported full inclusion. I'm not as active as I used to be so I probably won't see any other updates. Squatch347 (talk) 14:55, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for taking the time! Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:59, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Guidehouse

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

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further 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. Liz ^Read! Talk! 16:00, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:45, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Paxos Trust Company has been accepted

Paxos Trust Company, 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Nightenbelle (talk) 19:07, 18 December 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Billy Starr

Hello, MaryGaulke. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Billy Starr".

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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. Liz ^Read! Talk! 21:45, 7 February 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Dan Ammann has been accepted

Dan Ammann, 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Noah!^💬 15:13, 2 March 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Paxos Trust Company for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paxos Trust Company is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Paxos Trust Company until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

DGG ( talk ) 10:08, 6 May 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Edelman Financial Engines has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Edelman Financial Engines. Thanks! DGG ( talk ) 07:25, 9 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Edelman Financial Engines has been accepted

Edelman Financial Engines, 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 C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 21% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! 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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Devonian Wombat (talk) 23:19, 22 June 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Neville Ray (July 24)

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

Tame (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MaryGaulke! 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! Tame (talk) 20:19, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Edifecs has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Edifecs. Thanks! DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:26, 16 August 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Edifecs (August 19)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by HighKing was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Editor was requested to provide the three best sources to establish notability. None of the three sources meet NCORP requirements. Geekwire reference is a report based on a field trip to the company's office. All of the information originates from the company or the founder and there is no "Independent Content" as per WP:ORGIND. Bizjournals reference begins with a standard profile which can be found in every article and press release and continues with quotes from interviewing the founder. Again, no "Independent Content" and fails ORGIND. Final reference from Healthcare IT News discusses a software solution which was developed "with support from" the topic company. It is a passing mention and contains no in-depth information on the company, fails WP:CORPDEPTH.

HighKing^++ 20:43, 19 August 2021 (UTC)

ArbCom 2021 Elections voter message

Hello! Voting in the 2021 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 6 December 2021. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2021 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:38, 23 November 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Austin Russell (December 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Robert McClenon 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:Austin Russell 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:Austin Russell, 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.

Robert McClenon (talk) 07:45, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

Hello, MaryGaulke! 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! Robert McClenon (talk) 07:45, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

COI LegalShield

I would like to know what your conflict of interest is concerning LegalShield. I'm still learning about the company my wife and I are promoting. 24.206.218.117 (talk) 11:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)

Hi! LegalShield hired me to request edits to Wikipedia's coverage of the company and its products. I hope that helps – let me know if you have any other questions! Mary Gaulke (talk) 17:34, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Neville Ray

Hello, MaryGaulke. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Neville Ray, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:03, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ari Rastegar (February 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 CNMall41 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:Ari Rastegar 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:Ari Rastegar, 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.

CNMall41 (talk) 15:22, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

I will openly admit I am not fond of paid editors. However, I respect the fact that you have made the proper disclosures of your COI and are willing to work within the community openly. With that in mind, hopefully I can give you a few bits of advice on this draft (which I normally wouldn't do for a paid editor). Looking at it closely, it has a lot of information about the company, including intricate details that only the person himself would care about. Think from the standpoint of what a regular person coming to Wikipedia would want to see. Once you see it from that light, you will understand what needs to be removed as far as promo. Also, since it contains a lot of information about the company, have you considered the notability of the company versus the notability of the person? If the notability lies within the company, then it may be better to focus on a page for that instead of the founder. Again, just a thought, not an endorsement. Happy editing. --CNMall41 (talk) 15:27, 9 February 2022 (UTC)

@CNMall41: Thank you for taking the time to share such specific feedback – I really appreciate it. I've just revised the draft to take out a lot of the information on the company and resubmitted. I do believe Rastegar meets WP:NBIO, although I see your point about the company, too. Anyway, happy to hear any additional feedback you'd like to share, and thanks again for your time. Mary Gaulke (talk) 14:18, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Edifecs

Hello, MaryGaulke. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Edifecs, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 04:02, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ari Rastegar has been accepted

Ari Rastegar, 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.

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 leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Missvain (talk) 17:53, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Ari Rastegar (May 2)

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

Gusfriend (talk) 11:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MaryGaulke! 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! Gusfriend (talk) 11:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, MaryGaulke. I happened across your username and remembered you from several years ago. After reading the notes about the draft on Ari Rastegar being declined, I took a look at it, then spent some time searching for more sources. I didn't find them. Unfortunately, it looks like it will be difficult to prove that he's notable in the Wikipedia sense. You might have better luck with coverage of his company, although given the articles that showed up in the search for more information on Rastegar, depth of coverage may be a problem. I know Wikipedia's rules and guidelines can be demanding, and I appreciate your working within them. I wish all paid editors would do the same. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Gusfriend, thanks for your review. @BlackcurrantTea: Thanks for taking the time to do some research and share your input! I'm honestly surprised that Rastegar might not meet WP:GNG. I think several of the citations in the article (e.g. Commercial Observer, D Magazine, GQ, CBS DFW, Austin Monthly) qualify as significant coverage and reliable sources – am I off base here? Want to make sure I'm understanding for my future work as well. Many thanks. Mary Gaulke (talk) 01:03, 16 May 2022 (UTC)

@Gusfriend and BlackcurrantTea: Hi both! I promise this is the last ping, but just double checking if either of you have input in response to what I wrote above. No worries if not; just trying to make sure I'm understanding how the guidelines apply here. Thank you again. Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:13, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Article is looking better now than when I reviewed it and certainly worth submitting again. Gusfriend (talk) 10:13, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks! Mary Gaulke (talk) 13:41, 14 July 2022 (UTC)

Hi, MaryGaulke. I'm sorry for taking so long to get back to you; my schedule's been a bit mad lately. I see the article's been moved to mainspace, so it looks like all's well. Cheers, BlackcurrantTea (talk) 05:45, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

No worries! Thanks for the reply. Mary Gaulke (talk) 02:58, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Concern regarding User:MaryGaulke/sandbox/Neville Ray

Hello, MaryGaulke. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that User:MaryGaulke/sandbox/Neville Ray, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 17:02, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

impatience

Rather than misuse WP:COIN for your business interests, try offering a reward at WP:RB. Volunteer editors have to see a reason to edit or they won't. — Chris Troutman (talk) 21:19, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the advice; I'm surprised I've never heard of this forum before. If you happen to know and are willing to advise – I can't find any RB-specific COI guidance. (Closest recent discussion I could find was an unanswered question on talk.) I assume monetary rewards would be inappropriate but reciprocal editing (of non-COI articles) would be OK? I am always eager to show my gratitude to volunteers who help my work, but it's a tricky needle to thread without introducing additional bias into the review process. Sincerely appreciate any insight you're willing to share. Mary Gaulke (talk) 21:49, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

So long as you state in your post that you have a CoI, I think you're fine. The awardee would have a CoI themselves if they complete your task for reward so you might point that out. I see no reason why you cannot offer a monetary reward, although many might edit just for a barnstar. Again, the only problem Wikipedia as a community has is ensuring transparency. Only some editors hate CoI editors out of jealousy. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:54, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

I'm surprised by that, honestly – if an editor has a COI from a reward, I would think that they would be discouraged from editing directly the same way that I am, regardless of disclosure. I'm not sure I understand the difference, but I'll keep looking into it to make sure I'm not running afoul of any guidelines. Thanks again for your time. Mary Gaulke (talk) 22:05, 2 November 2022 (UTC)

@MaryGaulke: If add that entry up at the coin noticeboard again, which is entirely the venue, I will start issuing warnings against for disruptive editing. scope_creep^Talk 15:49, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I assure you I do not intend to repost. I had many years ago been advised to use COIN as a rare measure in that fashion, and had done so a few times in years past without any negative feedback, but I understand now that the norms for the board have changed. Mary Gaulke (talk) 15:53, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

@Scope creep: You should note that it was not Mary who reposted the request at COIN, but another editor (Johnbod) in an apparent attempt to solicit more help for Mary (either before you posted your message here regarding WP:RB, or having not noticed that you had). WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 16:08, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

I just reverted your removal, which I think was wrong-headed, as is the suggestion to use WP:RB. Whatever your incoherent "If add that entry up at the coin noticeboard again, which is entirely the venue,..." is supposed to mean, I'm pretty sure I disagree. Johnbod (talk) 18:35, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Ignore that message please. I just assumed too quickly. Sorry scope_creep^Talk 16:23, 4 November 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for that context — I hadn’t even seen it had been reposted. No worries. Mary Gaulke (talk) 16:31, 4 November 2022 (UTC)