User talk:KirstyMcG4

Your submission at Articles for creation: CaptionHub (February 8)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Usedtobecool 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 after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:CaptionHub and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:CaptionHub Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Usedtobecool&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:CaptionHub reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:58, 8 February 2024 (UTC)

Editing notice
Hello KirstyMcG4. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:CaptionHub, 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 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 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:KirstyMcG4. 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. Primefac (talk) 06:03, 16 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi Primefac,
 * Thanks for your time and messages. I am not being directly compensated to create the page in the same way that contractors promote, though I do work for CaptionHub. I wanted to remain objective which is why we did try and source a company online that said they would write and submit an objective wikipedia page, I thought this was the process as per many articles online like Hubspot etc. Many of our partners, clients and competitors have Wikipedia pages and we have been informed multiple times by clients, leads, and partners there is a gap because we do not have one. There is no intent to be sales-y but rather just to have CaptionHub included on Wikipedia because it's where many people go for information, as you obviously know. I'm at a bit of a loss on how to proceed as we've tried our best to go about this in the best way, even paying when we thought that was the process, but have just been left feeling confused and berated despite good intentions. You seem extremely experienced, so I would appreciate your advice on how you would recommend we proceed if we would like something approved? We have many good objective media sources to cite, a clear description of the software that isn't sales-y, and it can potentially be much shorter. I could write it but I now am unsure if that's allowed.
 * Any insight would be greatly appreciated.
 * Thanks,
 * Kirsty KirstyMcG4 (talk) 17:21, 2 May 2024 (UTC)
 * You don't need to be explicitly paid to create this specific article, the fact that you are writing about an organisation you work for puts you squarely within our paid-editing rules. Please make the necessary disclosure as your very next edit, as instructed in Primefac's earlier message. Thank you. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:18, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: CaptionHub (May 23)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Ingenuity 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 after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:CaptionHub and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:CaptionHub Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ingenuity&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:CaptionHub reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

—Ingenuity (t • c) 03:08, 23 May 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, I noted you declined the submission based on sources, several of the sources included are mainstream objective 3rd party news sites (more objective than some of the wikipedia templates I cited for existing software see the software quoted in the submission) + over 8 more sources than equivalent software submissions that have been approved. For example, Broadcast is one of the sources and is one of the top monthly magazines for the United Kingdom television and radio industry, owned by Media Business Insight. At this point I feel like this submission is being much more harshly critiqued compared to others based on previous reviewers and I don't think that is a fair process. KirstyMcG4 (talk) 05:09, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: CaptionHub (May 23)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by DoubleGrazing 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 after they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:CaptionHub and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
 * If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:CaptionHub Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:DoubleGrazing&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:CaptionHub reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:16, 23 May 2024 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: CaptionHub (June 10)
 Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk/New_question&withJS=MediaWiki:AFCHD-wizard.js&page=Draft:CaptionHub Articles for creation help desk] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Ingenuity was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: There has been no improvement since this was last declined, and I do not see any evidence that the subject is notable. I am now rejecting this draft.

—Ingenuity (t • c) 02:19, 10 June 2024 (UTC)