User talk:Burgmaestro

Welcome!
Hello, Burgmaestro, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Roberto Vedovotto, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.
 * Article development
 * Standard layout
 * Lead section
 * The perfect article
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Roberto Vedovotto


The article Roberto Vedovotto has been proposed for deletion&#32;because of the following concern: "Promotional article"

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the page to address the issues raised. Removing will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. MrsSnoozyTurtle 21:36, 11 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Hola and thank you for notifying me. --Burgmaestro (talk) 01:44, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Roberto Vedovotto


A tag has been placed on Roberto Vedovotto, 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. MrsSnoozyTurtle 06:22, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Roberto Vedovotto for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Roberto Vedovotto 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 Articles for deletion/Roberto Vedovotto 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 until the discussion has finished. MrsSnoozyTurtle 22:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

ArbCom 2023 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2023 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. 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 2023 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 to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:54, 28 November 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Hello Burgmaestro. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Roberto Vedovotto (businessman), 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 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 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:Burgmaestro. 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. signed,Rosguill talk 18:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I am not and do not intend to be paid to edit Wikipedia. I know I only log in occasionally, I'd like to do it more but I lack free time. I mainly edit eyewear-related pages because it relates to my job (sunglasses shop owner), but I am in no way related to any of the companies or the persons of the pages I edited (I wish I were), except for some employees of Shwood Eyewear I met once at a wine tasting event. The eyewear industry is not very talked about in general, and that reflects on Wikipedia, which is why I started to edit Wikipedia in the first place. Roberto Vedovotto has been one of the big guns in the industry for the past decade, that's really the only reason for working on it. Burgmaestro (talk) 20:10, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Could you please comment on your decision to circumvent the consensus at Articles for deletion/Roberto Vedovotto by recreating the article at a different title? signed,Rosguill talk 20:22, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I think I replied to my own comment, not sure if you were notified of my reply. Burgmaestro (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I just saw you deleted the page again. Oh well... The different title was not an attempt to avoid scrutiny, I just started to create pages with the "(type)" to make page titles clearer. But I see how it looks malicious when you infer the hypothesis of paid edits. I'll just submit it again through whatever debate process it has to go through, just not right now (getting a page deleted is a real downer)... If Roberto Vedovotto is such an issue, I also created the page Massimo Renon (I listed the pages I created on my user page) which is along the same lines in terms of notoriety, should it be reevaluated? Burgmaestro (talk) 20:28, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I forgot to comment that I rewrote the first version of the Vedovotto article that had been deleted, because the first version was stuffed with whatever I had found online (rookie mistake), while the latest version you just deleted is focused on key info, which is why I thought it was OK for publication, and why I republished it a few weeks ago when the redirect was applied with a reference to the first version of the article... Burgmaestro (talk) 20:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It looks like that article was reviewed back in 2022, although I do agree that at a glance it seems like its coverage suffers from much of the same problem, that coverage is limited to announcements of Renon's appointment to one specific CEO position and statements made in that capacity. For what it's worth, if you ever want to give another crack at writing an article on Vedovotto, you can find the old draft stored in the article's history (here's a direct link for convenience). The key thing to improve moving forward is to identify additional (likely newly-published) references that contribute towards WP:GNG; tweaking wording or otherwise improving the quality of writing in the article is not relevant for an AfD, the sole issue is the availability of usable secondary sources. signed,Rosguill talk 20:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)

Category:Eyewear people has been nominated for deletion
Category:Eyewear people has been nominated for deletion. A discussion is taking place to decide whether it complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mason (talk) 21:43, 6 June 2024 (UTC)