User talk:Dsiout2017

Your submission at Articles for creation: AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania (July 11)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Jcc 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:AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the or on the.
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:16, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Dsiout2017. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Draft:AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:24, 11 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Essentially if you have a conflict of interest with AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania i.e. working for them, being paid to write the article let us know now to avoid problems down the line. If not, no worries, treat the above as a standard notice. Best wishes, jcc (tea and biscuits) 17:28, 11 July 2017 (UTC)

Reply
Hi, thanks for message. You can sign your comments automatically using four tildes ~. I don't know if you saw the AFC reviewer's comments, but several concerns were raised, which I'll cover below. I deleted your article because
 * it did not provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation, press releases, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, blogs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the organisation claims or interviewing its management. You gave some references, but nearly all were to your own site or to pages that were clearly not independent third-party sources
 * There's very little to show why the organisation is notable. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, funding or expenditure, not just claims sourced to your own website.
 * it was written in a promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic.
 * Examples of unsourced or self-sourced claims presented as fact include: it is the only independent public interest law firm in the nation that is exclusively dedicated... successfully defended more than 35,000 individuals and has educated more than 37,000 others... committed to educating the public... to become better advocates...&mdash; and so on. It's like a press release rather than an encyclopaedia article.
 * You have a dedicate section for awards and honours, always a bad sign, but report no criticism of the project
 * "Areas of Legal Expertise and Special Programs Offered" again, full of opinions, few verifiable facts


 * it's all about what the company organisation sells, little about the company organisation itself other than locations.
 * Not a reason for deletion, but there shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections. Note also that you should use sentence case for headings.
 * the article was a copyright violation of the project's website and others. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. The ALPP webiste is marked '© 2014 AIDS Law Project of PA, and is not free to distribute, modify or use for any purpose including commercial, as we require here. The reviewer also identified text and images seemingly from sites that either claim copyright or are not explicitly PD. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.
 * If you have a conflict of interest when editing this article, you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for the organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very 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 paid directly or indirectly by the company you are writing about, 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:. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:    . If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.

It's a widespread misconception that non-profits and other "good causes" are exempt from our rules, but that's not the case. We often restore deleted text, but for legal reasons we can't do so with copyright violations. I think in any case, you would do better to start from scratch if you want to try again. Before doing so, you should
 * 1) make sure that your organisation meets the notability criteria I linked above, and that you can find adequate independent verifiable sources
 * 2) Read this guidance.
 * 3) Write neutrally and in your own words
 * 4) Respond to the COI request I've made above

If you wish for further clarification or have any questions, please ask on my talk page. You can alternatively leave a message on this page, and I will know you have done so if you start it with my user name, User:Jimfbleak and sign it with four tildes ~ when you post it. That will send me an alert. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:19, 18 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I've seen your discussion at . I note that you have recreated without declaring a COI, ignoring the repeated request above. I also not that you appear to be tag teaming with, clearly a COI account. That suggests that you are either operating multiple accounts or that you are both editing on behalf of the organisation without declaring a COI. I'm therefore going to block both accounts and delete the article until I get a satisfactory response Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:15, 21 July 2017 (UTC)

User:Jimfbleak,

Dear Jim:

Thank you so much for your volunteer service to Wikipedia. Although a deletion is stressful, I understand the importance of guarding the credibility and neutrality of Wikipedia articles. We are eager to learn the ways in which we can adequately satisfy the criteria for publishing a Wikipedia article.

In response to your conflict of interest claim, it is important to make the preliminary point that me, GraysonALP, and Dsiout2017, are indeed affiliated with the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania as unpaid summer interns. We have made no attempt to hide this. As Wikipedia novices, we were unsure of how to disclose this conflict of interest. I ended my username with ALP in an effort to be transparent. It is also important to reemphasize the point that we are not paid.

Perhaps our only bias may be that we care deeply about advocacy for people living with HIV/AIDS and we initially had to piece together a plethora of third-party newspaper articles to get a holistic picture of what the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania does. Articles ranging from sources such as the New York Times to CNN. Although we are invested in efforts to protect this marginalized community, we stringently made sure not to present any information on the Wikipedia page that was not ascertained from third-party sources. Wikipedia is NOT for advertising and we wanted to honor that principle. The Wikipedia’s “Plain and simple conflict of interest guide” states: “The role of editors is to summarize, inform, and reference, not promote, whitewash, or sell.” This is what we made every effort to comply with.

We also prohibited anyone on the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania payroll to contribute to the drafting of the article. It was important that no one with a vested interest in the AIDS Law Project was involved in this process. Myself, GraysonALP, and Dsiout2017 receive no compensation in any form from the organization nor do we have any continued ties to the organization or their mission. We have both left the AIDS Law Project of Pennsylvania for the summer.

We were also pleased to see that the page was edited by other Wikipedia editors who we did not know.

Dsiout2017 (talk) 16:51, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for that. i'll look again in the morning Jimfbleak - talk to me?  19:07, 21 July 2017 (UTC)


 * OK, I'll restore the article to take its chances, unblock you and change GraysonALP's block to allow a new account to be created if wished Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:01, 22 July 2017 (UTC)