User talk:Doogierev

Doogierev, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Doogierev! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cullen328 (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:06, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Seddon (February 14)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

This is essentially advocacy. His examinations record at Grammar school is not pertinent; the name dropping is inappropriate; .the repeat of citations from the awards is promotional . I am not sure whether there will be any underlying 'ny after the promotionalism is removed, .

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:Joe Seddon 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:Joe Seddon, 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.

DGG ( talk ) 06:28, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Seddon (February 28)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

The problem is not primarily notability, but the rather promotional style in which he article is written. The use of quotes like "advertised as offering students “anytime, anywhere mentorship at the touch of a phone screen”" ; the name dropping -- if he received an honour it does not mater who gave it, and if he appeared on a platform, it is irrelevant who also appeared. Wha you need to do is cut back further on such material, and also to remove all references to he Mail -- this is no regarded as a reliable or even usable source in Wikipedia. There might be enough left.

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:Joe Seddon 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:Joe Seddon, 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.

DGG ( talk ) 17:33, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Seddon (February 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 Sulfurboy was:

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

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:Joe Seddon 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:Joe Seddon, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 14:18, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Joe Seddon has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Joe Seddon. Thanks! Sulfurboy (talk) 02:13, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Seddon (March 30)

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

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

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:Joe Seddon 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:Joe Seddon, 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.

WikiAviator (talk) 04:07, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Seddon (March 30)

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Joe Seddon 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:Joe Seddon, 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.

Sulfurboy (talk) 13:46, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2020

Hello Doogierev. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Joe Seddon, 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Doogierev. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Doogierev|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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 14:52, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Justlettersandnumbers, I can confirm that I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. I am an independent / outside observer who has been tracking the subject matter for a while now and I thought he deserved an article given his coverage in the British press. Doogierev (talk) 23:55, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could you clarify how you came by this photo, which you've claimed as your own work? _signed,Rosguill ^talk 22:49, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rosguill, it was taken from a Twitter user who referenced the subject who I asked permission from. I mistakenly clicked that the photo was mine own. This was a mistake and it has now been removed from the article. Thank you for bringing this to my attention. Doogierev (talk) 18:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Joe Seddon (May 5)

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 RoySmith was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: After being declined 5 times, resubmitted with no changes. Enough is enough.

-- RoySmith (talk) 02:02, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Joe Seddon for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Joe Seddon 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/Joe Seddon 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. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 22:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Joe Seddon moved to draftspace

An article you recently created, Joe Seddon, appears to be WP:COI/WP:PAID editing, and so needs to go through our Articles for Creation review system. If you think it is ready for review, you may submit it using the template on the page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

Welcome to Wikipedia. Constructive contributions are appreciated, but, in this edit to Joe Seddon, you removed Articles for deletion notices from articles or removed other people's comments in Articles for deletion debates. This makes it difficult to establish consensus. If you oppose the deletion of an article, please comment at the respective page instead. Thank you. Materialscientist (talk) 00:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

June 2020

Please do not use styles that are unusual, inappropriate or difficult to understand in articles, as you did in Oxbridge. There is a Manual of Style, and edits should not deliberately go against it without special reason. Please read about overlinking. David Biddulph (talk) 18:22, 7 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]