User talk:Ldopa88490

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gabriel A. Silva (February 3)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by The Drover's Wife 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:Gabriel A. Silva 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:Gabriel A. Silva, 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 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:Gabriel_A._Silva Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_Drover%27s_Wife&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Gabriel_A._Silva reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

The Drover&#39;s Wife (talk) 23:29, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Gabriel A. Silva (November 18)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Curb Safe Charmer 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:Gabriel A. Silva 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:Gabriel A. Silva, 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:Gabriel_A._Silva Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Curb_Safe_Charmer&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Gabriel_A._Silva reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Curb Safe Charmer (talk) 16:22, 18 November 2019 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:Gabriel A. Silva has a new comment
 I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Gabriel A. Silva. Thanks!  DGG ( talk ) 06:04, 25 November 2019 (UTC)

Draft:Gabriel A. Silva concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Gabriel A. Silva, 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) 01:23, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Ldopa88490. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Gabriel A. Silva, 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. signed,Rosguill talk 21:28, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

'This is critical, and unless responded to, I will as an administrator move the article back to draft status. and continuethe cleanup there '.  DGG ( talk ) 21:47, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , given the prominence of the subject in question (h-index of 41, named chair at a major research university), I'm not sure that moving back to draftspace is appropriate, although Ldopa88490, you should understand that this is serious and your ability to edit further depends on your compliance with our disclosure policies. signed,Rosguill talk 21:52, 20 October 2020 (UTC)


 * But it would need to be completely rewritten in any case, My intention in moving it back to draft was for that reason as much as anything else. You may notice I and  between us have already removed about 1/4 the article, which had a remarkable combination of features: promotional, overcited, , and claiming too much in the way of applications is not unusual, but it was also totally unclear and duplicative.   For something as bad as this, it's not clear whether the best course is an extewnsive edit, or a complete replacement from scratch. And if I do that, why should the earlier history remain?
 * As it is, I will in practice let even obvious coi for a really notable scientist go without too much comment if the article is reasonably competent. Otherwise we'd have to remove half the articles. At least they're easy enough to rewrite. if I can find a real CV.   I just do the basic bio and add the most cited articles, and the prizes,  and leave out   description  which is implied in any case by the publications and the prizes.  DGG ( talk ) 23:45, 20 October 2020 (UTC)
 * Fair enough. My philosophy is that the article is more likely to receive the rewrite attention that it needs in mainspace, but if you're planning on actively working on it then that's a moot point. signed,Rosguill talk 00:02, 21 October 2020 (UTC)
 * the only way I can figure out how to get articles or drafts the necessary attention for improvement is for those few of interested, like you and me and the others who will recognize themselves,   to clone ourselves. Repeatedly.  But getting back to in-person meetups will help.  DGG ( talk ) 18:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * But the truly difficult question that even this won't help is what to do with material submitted in defiance of the terms of use or by blocked editors, in those 10% of the time when it happens to be useable. All options here are bad, with major implications for the contiued usefullness fo Wikipedia I can, nad have, argued both or and against all the possibiltles.  DGG ( talk ) 18:35, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * , we should probably take this discussion elsewhere, but I think it's a case by case basis for those. If the articles have obvious encyclopedic value above and beyond our notability guidelines (e.g. acclaimed researchers) I feel more inclined to accept and tag than I would for an article about a businessperson that happens to probably meet GNG. signed,Rosguill talk 18:56, 24 October 2020 (UTC)
 * As should be clear by now, I feel just the same. To some extent it's our shared bias, but on the other hand everyone here has the right to work on (or rescue) whatever interests them . This has been discussed so abundantly elsewhere in so many places without resolution, that I am reluctant to start another general discussion.  DGG ( talk ) 19:30, 24 October 2020 (UTC)