User talk:Sdgwilson

Your submission at Articles for creation: Independent Social Research Foundation (January 31)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by WikiDan61 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:Independent Social Research Foundation 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:Independent Social Research Foundation, 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:Independent_Social_Research_Foundation Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:WikiDan61&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Independent_Social_Research_Foundation reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

WikiDan61 ChatMe!ReadMe!! 19:17, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Independent Social Research Foundation


A tag has been placed on Draft:Independent Social Research Foundation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement. This page appears to be a direct copy from http://www.isrf.org/funding-opportunities/grant-competitions/#ECF. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

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. Nosebagbear (talk) 20:40, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Copyright, notability and conflict of interest
Thank you for your interest in creating an article for Draft:Independent Social Research Foundation on Wikipedia. There are multiple problems with your submission. You cannot post copyrighted material on Wikipedia even if you are the copyright holder, unless special licensing permissions are in place. In short, a copyright owner cannot offer Wikipedia a one-time license for use. Rather, the copyright to the material has to be released – permanently and irrevocably – into the public domain or under a free copyright license that is compatible with Wikipedia's licenses. This is because Wikipedia aims to be freely distributable and copyable by anyone, so all content must be licensed for that purpose. You can learn more about this policy at Copyrights. The second problem is notability. I am not sure the organization you are writing about is notable enough, as Wikipedia defines it, to have an article. We require write-ups in reliable third party sources such as newspapers, magazines, or online publishers to establish notability. New articles about persons or organizations that are not notable are typically deleted. The third problem is conflict of interest. Writing an article about your own organization or that of a client is strongly discouraged, as it is difficult to maintain the required neutral point of view.

If you'd like to use the copyrighted content in an article, you can follow the instructions at Requesting copyright permission on how to obtain the proper licensing. If you are the copyright holder, refer to Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for how to grant us permission to use your content. Alternatively, you could write a new article that does not closely paraphrase the material available online. See Copying text from other sources for more information. However you would then still have to abide by the conflict of interest guideline, and even so, there is a likelihood that the article may be deleted due to lack of notability. In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

I'm sorry this message could not be more favourable. If you have any questions, you can leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:48, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest
Hello, Sdgwilson. 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, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * 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 must 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 WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. – Athaenara ✉  20:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. – Athaenara ✉  20:20, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Please unblock, this is not a productive or efficient way of discussing the issues, or allowing me to respond to comments...
Someone else will review this block. However, we cannot allow copyright violations to stand for legal reasons. This is why it was deleted and will not be restored. Your Foundation would need to license the content with a license compatible with Wikipedia and its purpose; they may not want to give up their rights to it. I wouldn't, if I were them. Furthermore, original text is preferred even without copyright/legal issues. As I stated, it's unlikely you will be unblocked without you agreeing to not edit about your organization and telling what it is you will edit about instead- but that will be up to the next reviewer. 331dot (talk) 13:21, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * We'll, as I've said somewhere earlier in this, I can either issue the permissions for reproduction of content or - more likely - edit the text in the article such that is not just a reproduction of what's on the website. But I can't do that if I'm blocked and the page isn't undelete and returned to draft form so that I can actually make the edits that have been suggested! I'm happy to be judged on the objectives city - or otherwise - of the page once it's finished, but it's a bit much being judged on it when it's in-progress, and when I can't even take on board and incorporate people's suggestions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdgwilson (talk • contribs) 18:47, 3 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Pages that were deleted as copyright violations cannot and will not be restored, on the grounds that (1) if the editor needs the text that bad they can just go to the source they lifted it from and (2) that would make Wikipedia outright liable for copyright infringement. —A little blue Bori v^_^v  Bori! 21:07, 3 February 2019 (UTC)


 * Well, (1) you forget all the formatting, links layout etc., and (2) not of I either give the consent for the text to be reproduced from the ISRF website or - as I've made repeatedly clear would be the more likely course of action - rewritten the text so that it is 'original'. I'm not asking for the page to be made live, but for me to be unblocked and the page returned to draft so that I might actually attempt to satisfy the requirements that have been set out. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sdgwilson (talk • contribs) 21:15, 3 February 2019 (UTC)

Block modified
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. In addition, your ability to edit your talk page has also been revoked. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then submit a request to the Unblock Ticket Request System. – Athaenara ✉  21:56, 3 February 2019 (UTC) --UTRSBot (talk) 08:17, 4 February 2019 (UTC)