User talk:A1ProtocolX

AfC notification: Draft:Andre Soares has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Andre Soares. Thanks! Robert McClenon (talk) 06:21, 1 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for mentioning disambiguation! A1ProtocolX (talk) 13:20, 1 August 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Andre Soares (Brazilian-American writer, actor)


A tag has been placed on Andre Soares (Brazilian-American writer, actor), 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 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. PICKLEDICAE🥒 21:37, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello, A1ProtocolX. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. – Athaenara ✉  00:00, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Hi Athaenara,

I have no affiliation with the subject I wrote about.

I discovered this creative through a book club in Georgia State University and simply decided to offer my contribution.

It took me weeks to gather that information and format it to Wikipedia's guidelines. I wish there was some sort of vetting process or at least a warning requesting modifications in tone before deletion because we invest time in contributing and our time is precious, just like yours is.

I'm very disappointed with my first experience submitting for Wikipedia.

This is supposed to be a collaborative platform, not a ground to exercise arbitrary decisions. I can't even retrieve the source data.

Have a good one. A1ProtocolX (talk) 10:43, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

September 2022
Hello A1ProtocolX. The nature of your edits 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely 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:A1ProtocolX. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. 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. PICKLEDICAE🥒 13:05, 15 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your response. I am not affiliated with the subject or compensated in any way for this contribution. This is something I initiated on my own will. I am not in contact with the subject, I conducted a thorough investigation following sources I found and referenced in the article. I have no issues modifying the language if necessary. I also intend to contribute further in the future, on various subjects I'm familiar with but this was a very time-consuming endeavor so I needed to focus on that first. Please let me know if I can provide any proof or guarantee. A1ProtocolX (talk) 13:19, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Please explain how File:Andre Soares in 2020.jpg is your own work, then. PICKLEDICAE🥒 15:02, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I requested a picture from a few small productions he was involved in. The producers from the feature "Controlled" produced in Phoenix, AZ sent me this from a script reading session. They did not mention the photographer's name or objected to its use but I can review the article on Wikimedia commons and add a disclaimer to clarify.  A1ProtocolX (talk) 16:06, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * That doesn't explain why you uploaded it as your own work or how you did so with full meta data. PICKLEDICAE🥒 16:08, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It was an error uploading it as my own work. I am still getting familiar with Wikimedia's rules and processes and I thought that was the best option given the circumstances. I can request another file from another source if that's problematic. A1ProtocolX (talk) 16:16, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Andre Soares (Brazilian-American writer, actor)
Your article has been moved to draft space, where you can work on it before submitting for review. Please do not move it yourself. Deb (talk) 15:23, 15 September 2022 (UTC)


 * Thank you. I will review the feedback left on those sections and rework this draft to achieve full neutrality. Even being familiar with MLA and APA formats, I find that there are a lot of rules to absorb. But it serves a purpose, I suppose. A1ProtocolX (talk) 16:36, 15 September 2022 (UTC)
 * There's a lot I could comment on in this draft but I'll stick to a couple of major points, following my comment at the Teahouse today. First, you must not use links to IMDB within the body text. The main reason for not doing that is given at WT:WikiProject Film/Archive 79. IMDB is never considered a reliable source for Wikipedia (see WP:IMDB for discussion). It is OK for an external link, however. Secondly, you have quoted Soares "influences" in what will look to readers and article reviewers as an attempt to create notability-by-inheritance. That doesn't wash: I can't have an article on Wikipedia no matter how many prominent scientists I claim to have influenced me! Finally for the moment, you should refer to Soares only by his surname in the main text, per our Manual of style for biographies. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:13, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Looking again at the draft, I have to say that it is unlikely to be accepted by reviewers in its current state. For example, citations #1 and #2 are about the alleged crime in various areas where Soares lived but don't mention him at all. So where are the mandatory inline citations to back up the facts given about his life? See WP:BLP for the policy on this. Much of the rest of the article is based on interviews with him. That's no good in establishing his notability in Wikipedia's specific meaning of that word. Can you find and cite WP:INDEPENDENT material about him? Articles should almost entirely be based on such information. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:31, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey Mike! I appreciate your feedback and your help with references combination. I operated a few changes according to your recommendations:
 * I replaced first names with surnames.
 * I removed the IMDB links in body.
 * I combined references used multiple times.
 * Removed the influences section. It was never my intention to exercise notability-by-inheritance but I modeled this section on other BLPs I studied.
 * As far as the notability factor, I'd like to pick your brain. I contacted local figures in France and Brazil (I do not speak portuguese but they spoke English) based on the subject's social media connections to obtain the information about the legal issues and early life. I kept transcripts and logs. Unfortunately, as in most information pre-2005, there is no online source. I was able to find an article about his humanitarian project corroborating his story, however. As far as independent material, most creatives nowadays rely on social media for outreach and some prefer to use their own platform to build a community they can genuinely connect with (especially with the current trend in social media fatigue). I see that all the time reading indies and trad pub alike (I'm a bookworm). So how are we supposed to verify those things if we can't use the main medium that's utilized today, in the real world, as an index of notability? Traditional press is dying and most mainstream outlets only cover the heavyweights to cover their losses. I have no financial or personal interest in this so I don't mind sitting it out, it's not a big deal to me. But I've done the work to retrieve that information since I'm not in contact with the subject, it's a lot of time invested and I believe it is notable enough. Also, Andre Soares has a knowledge panel on Google as "Author". Thank you for your insight!  A1ProtocolX (talk) 17:49, 16 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that the fundamental problem here is that Wikipedia and "creatives" AKA "celebrities" have different objectives. Outreach is not an objective for WP and WP:PROMOTION here is forbidden by policy. This means that we as editors must show a topic (including a person) is notable without the sort of self-promotion that comes from interviews and social media created by the individual themselves. If such WP:INDEPENDENT material doesn't exist then there's nothing we as editors can do about it. This sometimes is because it is WP:TOOSOON for the person to have made an impact in such sources. Sources don't have to be online or even in English but they must have been published so they can be verified by our readers. WP has been caught out in the past by publishing inaccurate stuff about living people and now has a mandatory policy for such articles which means that every fact must have an inline citation. Some of the simple stuff like names of parents could be cited to the subject's own website but none of that would help the notability. What would help are reviews of his books and/or performances which give significant coverage and comment, not just to verify the fact that he did write something or act in some film or other. Writing decent articles for WP is hard and, frankly, you would probably be best to give up on this draft for the moment as you learn what's required by contributing to existing articles. Incidentally, your upload of that picture of Soares to Commons will soon be deleted. You can't just upload any old image you found on the web owing to copyright restrictions: Wikipedia takes these very seriously even if others do not. Sorry to be the bearer of all this bad news.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:46, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I totally understand, that's fine. Out of curiosity, how do you proceed about images, for other BLPs? How do you find a source that is freely licensed? For my knowledge, for further articles. Thank you for all your help. A1ProtocolX (talk) 14:51, 17 September 2022 (UTC)
 * It can be tough, which is why lots of articles don't have them. WP doesn't allow "fair use" images for living people (see WP:FAIRUSE). When you do an image search on Google, there is a tool so that you can restrict the hits to Creative Commons licenses (which is what are needed here). See for example how I've used that for the queen, with very limited results. In fact I could find more using Commons + categories, as at Commons:Category:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom by year but that's another story. If you can contact the person by email, for example, they may sometimes be prepared to donate a picture. See Commons:Email templates for the sort of process to use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:27, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Very helpful! Thank you! A1ProtocolX (talk) 18:13, 17 September 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Andre Soares


Hello, A1ProtocolX. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Andre Soares".

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. When 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. ✗ plicit  23:37, 29 April 2023 (UTC)