User talk:Fuib

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Darius Cosden


A tag has been placed on Draft:Darius Cosden, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. --- Possibly (talk) 22:25, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
Hello Fuib. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely 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 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:Fuib. 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. --- Possibly (talk) 22:27, 21 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Hello Possibly,


 * I completely understand why I have been flagged for this, but I am not under any contract or payment. I am doing this to save time for the individual.
 * Thanks. Are you in contact with them?--- Possibly (talk) 23:13, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, we talk over Discord. I agreed to do this after discussing what to include on the draft, with them. Fuib (talk) 23:15, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * It also doesn't help that I now need to somehow submit evidence regarding the image file? Even after being given consent to make the page, and include the image.
 * What should I do? Fuib (talk) 23:34, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * This is COI editing then. You should stop trying to promote him, as he's not notable at all by our standards. I'll leave you note on COI editing next. --- Possibly (talk) 23:56, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I understand it being a 'conflict of interest' but it is not a promotion/advertising but to inform. I have added the COI widget to my user page. But I repeat it is not a promotion, but for my own benefit, as I want to learn how to contribute here at Wikipedia. Fuib (talk) 00:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Fuib. 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, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * 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 are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. --- Possibly (talk) 23:57, 21 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I would like to note I am doing neither, this is not promote/advertise but to inform. A mutual agreement was made, as we believed it would be beneficial, for those whom wanted to know more about him. I believe the action is unjust, and I would ask you to take a different view on this matter, and let me rewrite the draft.

Thank you.
 * Then, please let me be clearer. There is no indication that this individual is appropriate for a Wikipedia article at all, and even if so, we absolutely do not permit the use of Wikipedia for any type of advertising or promotion. Wikipedia is not a social media site, and is not for individuals on social media to post "updates" about themselves. We have already had to delete promotional material twice. If there is a third time, you will be blocked from editing altogether. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:04, 22 May 2021 (UTC)


 * I was made aware direct links were disallowed, so they were removed. It was not promotional, both of the drafts should of been compared first, before a deletion was made, to see it wasn't a copy with the intent to advertise.
 * I have already clarified this is not promotional.
 * I had put in what I thought were the correct necessary changes from the first draft removal. Please note, I did not request a review of the topic - I did not want it reviewed, I was building the baseline of the draft, and would shorten and change a lot of what was included.
 * Before moderating, I'd rather you message me, so an understanding can be made, otherwise it is unjust. As I had clearly shown my actions were not to promote from deleting the direct 'links', which I 'myself' would clarify as promotional. Fuib (talk) 00:10, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Hello. You're not understanding how Wikipedia works. We only have articles on notable subjects. Your friend Darius is not notable. Since you have been told this but continue to want to create articles on him, we see your intent as promotion. There is no doubt that by our standards, you are engaging in promotion. Please don't recreate this article. Thanks. --- Possibly (talk) 00:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Please do not degrade my own understanding of Wikipedia, I know perfectly well how Wikipedia works. You clearly said my own intent was to 'promote' which is not factual, as it was made to inform users of his network about him. I will not repost to Wikipedia. Being more concise with moderation-actions especially to newer individuals, would be appreciated -- The reasoning behind the first draft and second draft deletion was not clear.
 * Have a great weekend though, luckily its Friday.
 * Stay safe. Fuib (talk) 00:20, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Promotion = inform users of his network about him. Feel free to edit subjects that you don't have a COI with. There are 6 million + other articles on Wikipedia. Have a nice weekend. --- Possibly (talk) 00:30, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * Ah, see if I was told that on the first draft I wouldn't of reposted, or retaliated against the other Administrator. Smaller explanations like that are more clearer than longer copy and paste warnings.
 * And yes have a good weekend! <3 Fuib (talk) 00:34, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I'm not an administrator. You had this explained about three times more than we explain it to most users. Read the notices next time: " the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic.". It's perfectly clear. --- Possibly (talk) 00:39, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I never said you were an Administrator, I said the 'other' administrator. Please re-read what I said. <3
 * Do not respond to this, thanks. Fuib (talk) 00:41, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * What you are attempting to do is not permitted here. I don't know how much more clearly that can be communicated to you. The promotional bit was not the reference links. (Well, they were, but that's not the main issue.) The very first thing to appear there is a puffy pull quote. That's completely inappropriate. Then you state that your intent is I need this approved so I can update it personally, as Cosden's social media application updates, and more information is distributed from him. That is not what Wikipedia is for. We are interested in what reliable and independent sources say about a subject, not in what the subject says about themself. If the answer is "not very much at all", and the best available sources are TikTok and YouTube, the individual does not meet our criteria for notability and we will not have an article about them at all. You are trying to do something that is not allowed here, and have been told that repeatedly. Stop trying to do it. If you would like to post "updates" from this individual's social media, you will need to do so somewhere besides here. Seraphimblade Talk to me 00:16, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
 * I did not mean updates from his Social Media, I meant updated information on the individual himself, please do not take what I've said out of context, as that is unprofessional. Do not accuse me of trying to turn Wikipedia into some social-media blog, which is clearly not what I intended to do.
 * Seraphimblade, do not talk down to me, stating 'I don't know how much more clearly that can be communicated to you' as that is very patronizing, and not professional -- whatsoever.
 * I do however agree the sources included were not reliable, that is why I made an invisible comment noting that. Furthermore, I will be using an open-source wiki source on the official site to control myself.
 * Do not reply to this, and have a good weekend! Fuib (talk) 00:27, 22 May 2021 (UTC)