User talk:OscarBoxcar

Your submission at Articles for creation: Bartholomew Brokesby has been accepted
 Bartholomew Brokesby, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask 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_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Bartholomew_Brokesby help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! — Danre98 ( talk ^ contribs ) 16:45, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Potguide


A tag has been placed on Potguide, 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.  DGG ( talk ) 09:36, 2 October 2021 (UTC)

October 2021
This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, as you did at PotGuide, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines.  DGG ( talk ) 21:13, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at PotGuide, you may be blocked from editing without further notice.  DGG ( talk ) 21:14, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Hello OscarBoxcar. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to PotGuide, 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:OscarBoxcar. 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.  DGG ( talk ) 21:17, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

Whatto Do
You asked me by email what to do., and mentioned the comparison with Leafly and Weedmaps,

The first thing you need to do is to make the declaration of conflict on interest as specified above. This is absolutely required according to our policy and terms of use, and is not optional. You should make it on both the talk page of this article, and on your user page. After you have done so, I will give you further advice.  DGG ( talk ) 00:26, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Declaration of Interest
OscarBoxcar is a freelance writer, hired by PotGuide to manage their business's entry in this encyclopedia alongside similar companies.


 * were your hired by or through any agency, listing service, or other intermediary?  DGG ( talk ) 16:25, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

I was hired directly by the company a year ago and this is simply my latest assignment, to get us listed in the proverbial phone book.


 * read the text in the warning above
 * 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.
 * You are not permitted to make an edit about the company in article space. I as an administrator, will decide whether to move the article to draft space, where you may legitimately work to improve it, or to improve it myself, or to list it for deletion if another administrator agrees.
 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a directory or "yellow pages". It does not list all firms in any line of business, only the ones that are notable by our rules, and for which editors without coi are willing to make articles.
 * It is perfectly reasonable that you want to advertise your company, but you may not do it on Wikipedia.  DGG ( talk ) 06:44, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Where to ask
Please ask me questions on my usertalk page, or the article talk p. and notify me, but not by email. In any event, I normally don't reply except on WP.

I did not say that the firm was not notable enough for an article. It might be. At WP we have the very strange rule that we go by the sourcing, not the intrinsic importance.Therefore everything you said about its intrinsic importance, and the needfor people to know about it,and the relative importance with respect to other compnies,is completely irrelevant. I'm not saying I necessarily agree with this, but it is the rule established at WP from the beginning. It has complete consensus, and as an administrator, I must judge according to it, and I must give you advice accordingly.

For companies, the sourcing requirements are  the deliberately restrictive WP:NCORP, which is restrictive precisely in order to cut down on paid editing. As for paid editing, Many WPedians think we should never permit it, even declared, and the main reason we haven't is because it would just  go underground, where much of it is already) The reason for restricting it is that experience has shown that it is almost impossible for a paid editor to write a proper article about the company they work for.  Paid editors naturally want to write addressing those who might be potential clients or customers (or students or donors or whatever--their background is almost always PR or advertising, and that's what advertising  is intended  for. I don't want to downgrade it: good pr or advertising can be very helpful, and for many things I and everyone uses it. But an encyclopedia is intended for another purpose: providing general information to the general public who may have heard of the subject and want to find out something about it. If they discover that they might be interested in a practical way, there's a link to the firm's website. So if paid editors do edit, we expect strict compliance with the rules, which include using truly independent sources that are not connected with the firm and are not mere notices. The other articles you mention have such sources, Potguide does not. Rather than list it for deletion, I'm going to allow for the posibility that there might be such sources, if not right now, within the next few months, and I'm moving it to Draft. If you can find them, add the good ones and remove the others. DGG Oct 28

PotGuide moved to draftspace
An article you recently created, PotGuide, is not suitable as written to remain published. It needs more citations from reliable, independent sources., that meetthe requirements of WP:NCORP. ). I've moved your draft to draftspace (with a prefix of " " before the article title) where you can incubate the article with minimal disruption. If you can find sufficient good sources thatare not interviewswith the firm or trivial notices, and thus is ready for mainspace, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page.  DGG ( talk ) 07:10, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:PotGuide
Hello, OscarBoxcar. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:PotGuide, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:02, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:PotGuide


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

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 deleted. If you plan on working on it further and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. Liz Read! Talk! 18:01, 13 July 2022 (UTC)