User talk:CubeThePenguin

Welcome!
Hello, CubeThePenguin, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Meta Runner, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * Best practices for editors with close associations
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 19:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey Fred, I just found out about the conflict of interest thing, so apologies. I would like to state that while I do work for Glitch, my contributions on the Wikipedia page are "unpaid" aka I'm doing this voluntarily, and it's something I would do regardless of my employment status. My contributions are intended to just clean up the pages of anything that's incorrect or redundant.
 * This is also an account only owned by me, it's actually a personal Wikipedia account as well. I'll be sure to contact you for proofreading just to make sure all is good. CubeThePenguin (talk) 19:08, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Whoops forgot to place Help Me before the message haha CubeThePenguin (talk) 19:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

May 2022
Hi Cube!

You said in an edit summary that you work for a company associated with an article you edited. Thanks for trying to make Wikipedia a better place! Please strongly note the requirements for paid contribution. Specifically, you must always disclose when you are being paid to edit, and it is strongly suggested that you add the following template to any Talk pages associated with articles you work on:

You may also wish to add the following template to your user page:

Thanks again. If you have any questions please contact me, and I'll do my best to either answer them or point you in the direction of someone who can. Theo (talk)  19:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hey Theo,
 * I do work for the company but I am not being paid to edit this at all and it is voluntary on my own time purely because I want to make sure the page is factual and polished. I'm wondering how I would be able to tackle this so that I can continue polishing up the wiki pages when needed. I have already replied above to @C.Fred as well about this. CubeThePenguin (talk) 19:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Realized I probably should've pinged you mymistake! @TheoCourt CubeThePenguin (talk) 19:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hey,
 * Thanks for the response. Sorry for the somewhat redundant notification, I started writing my message before Fred had posted his.
 * As far as I know, you're completely fine as long as you clearly announce your CoI on your user page and on any articles you edit, and obviously also abide by NPoV. But take Fred's advice over mine, he knows his stuff far better than I do. Theo  (talk)  20:02, 23 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Got it, thanks Theo no worries! You're all good and I'll be sure to abide by the rules here. CubeThePenguin (talk) 20:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Glitch Productions
Hey, so sorry I didn't reply to your final message earlier. Please allow me to answer your questions in the AfD.

First off, independence according to Wikipedia standards means that sources about the subject (Glitch) should come from either published books, scholarly journals, or mainstream media sources that aren't directly affiliated with them in any way. For example, a New York Times review about Meta Runner from a professional journalist who had never heard about the show beforehand counts as an independent source - since they aren't involved with the show's creation or know the members personally, they can write the review from a more neutral perspective. Meanwhile, a review from someone at Screen Australia may not be independent because SA already has a vested interest with Meta Runner via funding the show. As a result, their review may potentially be less neutral than desired. It would be like if Marvel Studios wrote a review praising Avengers: Endgame - there's a reason why their trailers use reviews from outlets like The A.V. Club or Variety. If you want to know more, see WP:IS.

Second off, in order for GP to pass the notability guidelines, there needs to be sources that should talk about Glitch Productions as a whole, including its history and formation as a company, the members, and the various ventures they pursued and shows they created, along with any other further commentary, opinion and analysis as a company. While some of the sources we discussed in the AFD were promising, they ultimately weren't full significant coverage of them as a company (ex. a 1,000 or more word article about them). Of course it's fine and quite desirable to use sources that discuss both the company and the works they did as well, like the creative process the brothers took to make Meta Runner or Sunset Overdrive. But in those cases there needs to be enough information about the company as a whole alongside their works. So long as multiple sources goes in-depth on both their works AND the company, it should be enough to pass WP:NCORP.

Finally, it doesn't need to be rewritten entirely from scratch. As aforementioned, there was already a draft that existed before someone turned the redirect into an article. So if you do find new sources that cover GP in detail, you may add them to the draft without entirely recreating it again. There isn't a deadline so as long as you keep editing the draft it will remain on Wikipedia; once you're confident it meets the notability guidelines you can submit it in AfC. Keep in mind however that at the end of the day, "no amount of editing can ever overcome a lack of notability" - that is it won't be fully notable until good sources exist for GP.

I hope this clears things up. Admittedly I'm by no means an expert on Wikipedia guidelines, so if you ever need any help with anything I recommend going to the Wikipedia Teahouse or asking editors more knowledgeable than me. And one last thing - I apologize if the AfD didn't turn out in your favor. If it were up to me, I would be 100% fine with GP having its own article if it fully meets the guidelines. Hopefully more good sources arrive for GP in the future. PantheonRadiance (talk) 05:59, 9 June 2022 (UTC)