User talk:Bambikha

March 2018
Hello, I'm Pablomartinez. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jacquie Jordan have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. ''Your edits seem to be trying to build a resume, not an encyclopedic resource. I'd recommend setting up a personal website for most of this content on this article.'' PabloMartinez (talk) 20:30, 26 March 2018 (UTC)

Hi! New to this and there was, what I thought some valuable info to add. I will read up more on proper edits. Thank you!Bambikha (talk) 18:49, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of TVGuestpert


A tag has been placed on TVGuestpert requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. —C.Fred (talk) 23:20, 2 May 2018 (UTC)

Paid editing in Wikipedia
Hi Bambikha. Thanks for disclosing here that you worked on TVGuestpert for pay, as a contractor.

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. Unmanaged conflicts of interest can also lead to people behaving in ways that violate our behavioral policies and cause disruption in the normal editing process. Managing conflict of interest well, also protects conflicted editors themselves - please see WP:Wikipedia is in the real world, and Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for some guidance and stories about people who have brought bad press upon themselves through unmanaged conflict of interest editing.

As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step, and you did that now. Thanks again for disclosing.

To finish the disclosure piece, would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:Bambikha - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple like: "I am a contractor for TVGuestpert and have a conflict of interest with regard to that company and related topics" would be fine. If you want to add anything else there that is relevant to what you want to do in WP feel free to add it, but please don't add anything promotional about the company or yourself (see WP:USERPAGE for guidance if you like).

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:
 * a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and
 * b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to
 * (i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and
 * (ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section, put the proposed content there, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) please the  tag to flag it for other editors to review.  In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once.  Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example.  This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (There are good faith paid editors here, who have signed and follow the Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, and there are "black hat" paid editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).


 * But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important!  There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia.   Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines.  Learning and following these is very important, and takes time.   Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines.  Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work on the TVGuestpert article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss.

Oh, also, User:Jytdog/How has a section providing advice about how to go about writing a new article. Please do have a look at it. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 01:22, 5 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Jytdog! Thank you for your thorough coverage of what I need to do. I went ahead and followed your instructions and created the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process. I guess I will see what happens. I will definitely follow up and read the through the other content you shared as well. I also add the note to my Talk page. I appreciate your help with this.Bambikha (talk) 20:57, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for reading, and replying, and disclosing, and putting the page through AfC! Perfecto.   AfC can take a while, please be patient, and if the page is rejected, please really listen to the feedback.
 * and by the way -- Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and so on, always adding one more...and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this  in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread.  I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit.  That is how we know who said what to whom and when.


 * Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).


 * thanks again! I will look at the draft and give some comments at its talk page. Jytdog (talk) 21:24, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Great! Perhaps I will one day be a Wiki Wizard! I will patiently wait to see what the results will be.
 * Please sign your posts! So... something went wrong with the AfC tag  - you broke the formatting somehow, so I "reset" it.  It is not submitted now.   There is work that should be done before you try to submit it again - I left notes on the talk page.  Wikipedia articles need to be driven by independent, secondary sources. The page as it stands is really obviously motivated by what "message" the company wants to put out.  that is backwards. Jytdog (talk) 22:30, 7 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I will review the content and try to rewrite it so that it is less promotional. You have been so helpful.Bambikha (talk) 18:37, 8 May 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: TVGuestpert (June 4)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Shadowowl 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:TVGuestpert 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:TVGuestpert, 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:TVGuestpert Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Shadowowl&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:TVGuestpert reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

&raquo; Shadowowl  &#124;  talk  11:41, 4 June 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: TVGuestpert (October 6)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Waggie 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:TVGuestpert 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:TVGuestpert, 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 [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:TVGuestpert Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Waggie&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:TVGuestpert reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Waggie (talk) 16:19, 6 October 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:TVGuestpert


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

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, 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! 23:43, 23 April 2019 (UTC)