User talk:Emmanuel Pacings

Your submission at Articles for creation: David Gokhshtein (December 12)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Praxidicae 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:David Gokhshtein 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:David Gokhshtein, 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 do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * 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:David_Gokhshtein Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Praxidicae&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:David_Gokhshtein reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Praxidicae (talk) 17:58, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019
Hello Emmanuel Pacings. 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 Draft:David Gokhshtein, 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 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:Emmanuel Pacings. 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. Praxidicae (talk) 17:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Hello Praxidicae! Ah I see, I apologize I am very new to contributing articles I did notify another reviewer of this before I resubmitted but they never responded. I was unsure if I would be considered employed.

I was showing off edits I had made to this website on Twitter and David Gokhshtein contacted me there asking for help with his page.

Never wanting to turn someone down in need I obliged. I cleaned up the article to make it look more encyclopedic and added the picture.

He then thanked me for the help of his own volition and not due to me asking. Sending me money. I say of his own volition. I do not run a business based on editing wikipedia articles or anything of the nature.

I am am in this due to the fact that I support open and free information on the web and I think someone who is mentioned IN the 2020 Congressional Election wikipedia page should have their own considering how important that information can be.

I apologize if I have made any mistakes I just don't see why the article is being declined. I have little to no relationship with this man and have had limited interaction. I made my points as objective as possible editing out any language that would paint him in a negative or positive view and focusing directly on the facts. I see in no way how I could be seen as promoting him.

Best wishes - Emmanuel Pacings

Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 18:40, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * running for a seat does not make someone notable. And yes, you were paid so you are required by the terms of use to disclose this. Praxidicae (talk) 19:01, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Please also see this specifically, Paid editors must also provide links on their Wikipedia user page to all active accounts at websites where they advertise paid Wikipedia-editing services. If an advertisement is removed, any corresponding links on the Wikipedia user page must remain visible for at least one week. before editing further. Praxidicae (talk) 19:07, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

"Running for a seat does not make someone notable."

But not only are they running they not only an entrepreneur but have sufficient media coverage.

Was the only reason this article was denied because of my lack of payment discoloure? Which I wholeheartedly admit to and sincerely apologize for. I'm not new to editing wikipedia but certainly new to something like this! Best wishes - Emmanuel Pacings Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 19:14, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No, it certainly doesn't have the required coverage but you still have not disclosed as required per the terms of use. You said you're not new to editing, but your account is 3 days old. Please disclose your past accounts too. Praxidicae (talk) 19:23, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I'm not new to editing as in I used to edit wikipedia without an account anonymously. This is my first wikipedia account.

But he has coverage from Forbes, The Street, CSNY and Business Insider, how are these not proper sources fro, legitment news organizations.

Best Wishes- Emmanuel Pacings Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 19:38, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid you're missing the point here: you must comply with the paid editing disclosure requirements in order to edit about a subject for which you have received, or will receive payment for. Praxidicae (talk) 19:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

So just resubmit the article with that information? Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 19:44, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * No. Do not resubmit the article until you can provide adequate sourcing. Follow the instructions that are laid out above for the disclosure requirements, including where you advertise your services. Praxidicae (talk) 19:50, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

You just said I missed the point when I brought up the sourcing so I didn't think that was an issue.

I don't have any wikipedia services but okay I'll list him as an employer next time...

Best wishes - Emmanuel Pacings Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 20:05, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * You literally just said above that you were paid. Praxidicae (talk) 20:41, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

He paid me out of thanks he didn't hire me and I didn't ask him for payment.

Best Wishes - Emmanuel Pacings Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 20:45, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what is unclear here. You received pay after being solicited by the subject. It doesn't matter when he paid you or if it was a courtesy. You are a paid editor and are required to disclose per policy. Praxidicae (talk) 20:52, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Um...yes exactly I wasn't arguing with you.

Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 20:54, 12 December 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi Emmanuel. Based on what you've said, I think you need to immediately disclose your affiliation per WP:PAID before you next edit. Separately, it generally takes highly unusual circumstances for a candidate for elected office who has not previously been elected to be notable for a Wikipedia article on that basis; I'm not seeing those circumstances or sources here. Best, Kevin ( alt of L235 ·&#32; t ·&#32; c) 21:09, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

I edited it. You can view it on my page...best wishes...Emmanuel Pacings... Emmanuel Pacings (talk) 21:36, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Zombicorns
Hello, Emmanuel Pacings. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Zombicorns, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 23:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Zombicorns


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

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. 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! 22:33, 2 May 2021 (UTC)