User talk:EmmaPRISM

Speedy deletion nomination of PRISM Sustainability in the Built Environment (online publication)
Hello EmmaPRISM,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged PRISM Sustainability in the Built Environment (online publication) for deletion, because it seems to be inappropriate for a variety of reasons. For more details please see the notice on the article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:PRISM_Sustainability_in_the_Built_Environment_(online_publication)&action=edit&section=new&preload=Template:Hangon_preload&preloadtitle=This+page+should+not+be+speedy+deleted+because...+ contest this deletion], but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

G M G talk  18:28, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Disclosure of employment
Hello EmmaPRISM. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to PRISM Sustainability in the Built Environment (online publication), and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:EmmaPRISM. 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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:08, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Copyright, notability and conflict of interest
Thank you for your interest in creating an article for PRISM Sustainability in the Built Environment (online publication) on Wikipedia. There are multiple problems with your submission. You cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. In short, a copyright owner cannot offer Wikipedia a one-time license for use. Rather, the copyright to the material has to be released – permanently and irrevocably – into the public domain or under a free copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia's licenses. This is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, so all content must be licensed for that purpose. You can learn more about this policy at Copyrights. The second problem is notability. I am not sure the organization you are writing about is notable enough, as Wikipedia defines it, to have an article. We require write-ups in reliable third party sources such as newspapers, magazines, or online publishers to establish notability. New articles about persons or organizations that are not notable are typically deleted. The third problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organization or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view.

If you'd like to use the copyrighted content in an article, you can follow the instructions at Requesting copyright permission on how to obtain the proper licensing. If you are the copyright holder, refer to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to grant us permission to use your content. Alternatively, you could write a new article that does not closely paraphrase the material available online.However you would then still have to abide by the conflict of interest guideline, and even so, there is a likelihood that the article may be deleted due to lack of notability. In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

I'm sorry this message could not be more favourable. If you have any questions, you can leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:17, 4 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I completely understand. I wanted to put PRISM up on Wikipedia as it is a resource for those looking for information on different types of building materials (CLT, fluoropolymer coatings, etc.) and architectural design such ZNE, passive house, biophilic design. These editorial pieces are not paid - PRISM publishes this as a resource to help architects and other, find information easily. However I did hastily add this and apologize. I should have put more thought into this and, again, understand why you have deleted it. When I have more time I will add this with the appropriate information that fulfills your guidelines.
 * EmmaPRISM (talk) 18:05, 5 April 2018 (UTC)


 * I have placed your reply at the bottom of the page. The newest talk page messages should always go at the bottom of a conversation thread, so that they flow in the correct chronological order.
 * You are certainly welcome to try again later. However, I would advise you to use the Articles for Creation process next time, which lets you create a draft article outside the main article space. This puts it at less risk for deletion, and sends it through a review process from another uninvolved editor.
 * However, I would also advise you to review Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations. To be accepted on Wikipedia, this topic must have already received in-depth coverage in multiple reliable third-party sources. Without the required depth of coverage from independent sources, this topic will not be considered notable enough for inclusion.
 * You are associated with this topic, so please review Wikipedia's conflict of interest rules. If you are in a paid position with this topic, then you are required to disclose this per Wikipedia's paid editing disclosure rules.
 * Finally, be aware that you will not have any right of ownership or editorial control over any content you submit. Wikipedia articles are editable by anyone, perhaps substantially over time. Consensus is Wikipedia's fundamental model for editorial decision making, and is marked by addressing legitimate concerns held by editors through a process of compromise while following Wikipedia policies. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:25, 13 April 2018 (UTC)