User talk:Georgi D

Your submission at Articles for creation: Delasport (August 29)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by SamHolt6 were:

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:Delasport 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:Delasport, 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:Delasport Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:SamHolt6&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Delasport reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SamHolt6 (talk) 01:16, 29 August 2019 (UTC)

Editing with a possible conflict of interest
Hello Georgi D. 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 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:Georgi D. 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. --SamHolt6 (talk) 21:51, 3 September 2019 (UTC)

Answer
Hello SamHolt6,

I've been having my wiki profile for a couple of years, and I haven't used it for about 2. Recently, I decided to write a new article, read articles and instructions on Wikipedia for more than 11 hours, just to make sure I do it right. Then I've checked other articles to see structure etc. checked your commend ofc. and according to it made some changes and still, the article is not good enough for wiki. When I compare it with other articles, it seems very legit and honestly, the points for rejecting it that you are mentioning are questionable for me (again, I'm comparing it with other articles) + I'm not so experienced writer on Wikipedia but.

In my writing exp. such things happened to me before, many times I see an example for something written on the internet, I'm writing the same using the specific "example" for example, but it's not excepted. After addressing the issue and asking why it's not expected, pointing existing examples, the editor/moderator sees that he did a mistake, mainly cause when you are dealing with the same subject for a long time you lose the clear vision and specification a bit (+dealing with the public :X ). That's why 2nd and 3rd opinion is always welcome for me.

For the specific article about Delasport, I've been researching, reading, writing, etc. for around a week in my spear time and more. And for me, it doesn't make sense to proceed with it, cause clearly whatever I do, it's not enough... And don't worry, I'm not getting paid for this... Why would I waste so much time, for something like that? I would better go and win some easy money and not struggle with the specific coding of the wiki site, having this conversation (no hard feelings, nothing personal), which is very educational and showing to me that being a writer on Wikipedia on a daily basis is a lots of efforts and not an easy task if you want to do it completely right...

Probably, I'm going to follow your example for using articles for creation process, cause I really hate to have unfinished things. I like to finish what I've started, cause I'm a bit stubborn + I'm a man :) . But not now, cause I'm too drained from all this exp. seeing all my efforts didn't lead to the point I was hoping they will (like studying so hard for a test and you get "D" :D - been there, done taht...). I'll go to a little vacation instead :)

I would really appreciate if you help me with some specific instructions regarding the process of "article for creation" cause when I was looking for a specific "thing", and the instructions and guidelines for it, I found 10 pages on Wikipedia regarding "this thing" (I think it was for uploading an image) and it's was a very messed up for a new writer/user exp.. And if there is a way of not wasting all my work on the draft like that, but instead, getting it redone by someone else and uploaded, it would be splendid...

I wish you a very good and productive day SamHolt6 and hope to hearing from you again.

Stay real!

P.S. Btw thanks for the quick answer and review since the normal time frames are 8 weeks...

Your submission at Articles for creation: Delasport (November 24)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Sagotreespirit 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:Delasport 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:Delasport, 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:Delasport Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Sagotreespirit&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Delasport reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

— Sago tree spirit  (talk) 16:28, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Delasport concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Delasport, a page you created, has not been edited in 5 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. 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 at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 01:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Delasport


Hello, Georgi D. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Delasport".

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 nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia! TheImaCow (talk) 14:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC)