User talk:FinalFrontier.003

Welcome! (We can't say that loudly enough!) ''' Hello, FinalFrontier.003, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:
 * Be Bold!
 * Learn from others
 * Be kind to others
 * Contribute, Contribute, Contribute!
 * Tell us a bit about yourself
 * Our great guide to Wikipedia

If you have any questions or problems, no matter what they are, leave me a message on my talk page. Or, please come to the new contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type  on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.

Please sign your name on talk pages and votes by typing four tildes ( ~ ); our software automatically converts it to your username and the date. We're so glad you're here! Meatsgains (talk) 01:44, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Big River Packaging


A tag has been placed on Big River Packaging requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:02, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

March 2018
Regarding Speedy Deletion

Hello, FinalFrontier.003. Thank you for helping to build Wikipedia-- the world's largest free content encyclopedia. I'm sorry, but a page you created, Big River Packaging, has been deleted as meeting one or more of the Categories for Speedy Deletion.

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia-- subjects of articles must meet notability guidelines with reliable sources providing verifiable information. '''Someone unconnected with the subject needs to have written a great deal about the subject. '''

Any deficiencies should be remedied before reposting as they can lead to repeated deletions. The new user tutorial can help you avoid future problems.

Wikipedia is not a webhost. You may wish to consider alternative outlets.

If you want to try again, please use the Article Wizard or articles for creation to guide you through the creation process.

You can make test edits in your sandbox.

You may find this tool useful for finding sources: Google custom search

Please see Wikipedia:Citing sources. Template:cite has templates you can use in citing your sources. Place the template at the bottom of the page, and references cited in the text will appear there. Don't feel discouraged. My first attempts at creating articles were deleted too. YOU CAN ASK FOR HELP AT THE TEAHOUSE

You can help us make Wikipedia better

 * Category:All articles needing copy edit


 * Category:Articles lacking sources


 * Category:Articles lacking in-text citations


 * There is more information at Community_portal Cheers, and happy editing. --Dloh cier ekim  (talk) 10:23, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Working in Wikipedia as a paid editor
Hi FinalFrontier.003. Thanks for being forthright on your userpage about editing for pay.

I spend time working on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing, which is mostly about health and medicine. I am not an administrator.

Lots of people come to Wikipedia with some sort of conflict of interest and are not aware of how the editing community defines and manages conflict of interest. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, FinalFrontier.003. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with 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).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. Unmanaged conflicts of interest can also lead to people behaving in ways that violate our behavioral policies and cause disruption in the normal editing process. Managing conflict of interest well, also protects conflicted editors themselves - please see WP:Wikipedia is in the real world, and Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for some guidance and stories about people who have brought bad press upon themselves through unmanaged conflict of interest editing.
 * Comments and requests

As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. You have started it, but would you please finish it? What I mean by that, is that pursuant to the WP:PAID you are obligated to disclose your employer, the client, and any relevant affiliation (by that we mean things (if you are a freelancer), "connected via Upwork") or the like -- otherwise it is just a catch-all for anything relevant not captured by "employer" (who is paying you) and the client.

Would you please add that information to your userpage for each set of paid edits you have done? Once you have completed that, i will do some cleanup behind you at article pages, and then we can talk about the "peer review" step, and then I can help you get oriented to the kind of content that is OK. But first things first, and complete disclosure is mandatory. If you'd reply here when the disclosure is done, we can take the next step. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 09:57, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi : I appreciate your patience and the explanations you've given here. I added the COI onto my user page. While I've been doing small edits and writing stubs for awhile now, Roivant Sciences is the first COI that I've taken on. My work until now has been to build up a feel for Wiki work, to add to the community in a natural way and to develop a deeper understanding of how the process works so that I could start to do COI work for clients, keeping within Wikipedia's guidelines. I work for myself and am not affiliated with any other company or consultancy firm. I certainly hope you can teach me better tactics for working together on a project of this sort and I look forward to hearing next steps from you. FinalFrontier.003 (talk) 11:10, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding the specific articles to the your user page - if you would add "freelancer" there somewhere, that would be useful so nobody asks later.
 * I've added a disclosure at the talk page for Roivant here, so now the disclosure is done locally (along with the disclosure in your message). I'll open a new section about the 2nd step as this section is getting long... Jytdog (talk) 15:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Step 2
As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask of editors who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:
 * a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and
 * b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to
 * (i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and
 * (ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section on the talk page, put the proposed content there formatted just as you would if you were adding it directly to the article, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) place the  tag to flag it for other editors to review.  In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once.  Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example.  This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (There are good faith paid editors here, who have signed and follow the Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, and there are "black hat" paid editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work on any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 15:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)


 * HiThank you so much for offering all of this information to me in a clear, calm manner. I can't tell you how much I appreciate it. Yes, I will certainly agree to work by these guidelines now that I understand them in full with any COI situations that I have and will have. I will get to work on the talk page with suggestions and I look forward to the feedback I hope to receive from you and others. Thanks again! FinalFrontier.003 (talk) 07:21, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for receiving this so graciously.
 * Since you seem to be just starting out doing this paid editing thing, I want to offer this to you to read: User:Jytdog, so you understand some of the context you are entering (that is a subsection of a larger section on my page about the problem of conflicted and paid editing -- and advocacy in general -- in WP). Lots of people in the editing in the editing community find paid editing to be... despicable, and you are likely to receive some rough elbows. I just want you to be aware of that, and of the ethics of what you are doing...
 * If you follow the process above and the content you propose aims for the mission and follows the policies and guidelines (which will often require you to do a lot of pre-negotiation with clients, who will want you to add content to WP that is not acceptable here) -- and be patient and remain gracious while working here, you should be OK. Jytdog (talk) 17:14, 14 November 2018 (UTC)

Nomination of Entuity Network Analytics for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Entuity Network Analytics 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/Entuity Network Analytics 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. MistyGraceWhite (talk) 04:11, 24 February 2020 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Roivant Sciences logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:Roivant Sciences logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:30, 19 October 2023 (UTC)