User talk:TDCBob

Welcome!
Hello, TDCBob, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * Best practices for editors with close associations
 * Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! GPL93 (talk) 15:34, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Help me
Thanks, I am a tech journalist and my idea is to post listings for young Belgian starts-up that I think have deserving technology. Belgium gets a bad rap but there are some neat but unknown companies here today. I do not get paid nor do I have any consulting or any other work with these companies. Like many tech journalists, I do some private consulting (I am helping an American company coming into Europe find distributors right now) but my Wikipedia work would be separate. As a journalist, I am aware of and agree to ethical boundaries. I did try to write this from a neutral point and I thought it was a fair description. Where I mention anything like an award, I listed a source. Happy to have you proofread and let me know if I failed to be neutral enough. All of these companies I am choosing because I "like" their technology. Like a music critic finds a new band and appreciates it. TDCBob (talk) 00:39, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, but doing so might be a violation of WP:SOAP. Correct me if I'm wrong. Firestar464 (talk) 03:21, 26 October 2020 (UTC)

I am new here looking for guidance but I don't think there is a WP:SOAPBOX violation. I am not writing posts advocating or promoting Belgium. And while I am starting as a newbie with pages on what's in front of me and yet missing on WP, it is a starting point (not my intention to limit myself to a few companies in Belgium.)

I am starting with Belgium because as an American high tech editor based here I am bumping into "notable" companies that have not yet been included. I think often times we overlook tech companies coming out of smaller countries (so if I have a soapbox, that's it but it would seem to dovetail with WP goals: to add what's missing.)

Nor am I using WP as a platform for my personal views on any subject but using my qualifications to figure out which high tech companies are notable yet missing from the encyclopedia-- and as a newbie I am very happy for other editors to check my choices and approve/modify my text to ensure neutral, non-commercial pages before publication.

WP:SOAPBOX says "Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery. All article topics must be verifiable with independent, third-party sources, so articles about very small garage bands or local companies are typically unacceptable. Wikipedia articles about a person, company or organization are not an extension of their website or other social media marketing efforts."

So it is clear to me that just because a company exists, that doesn't mean it deserves a WP listing. And if a company is notable, we should write in a neutral voice. That's what I was trying to do.

I am also trying to follow WP:ORGIN. "Wikipedia bases its decision about whether an organization is notable enough to justify a separate article on the verifiable evidence that the organization or product has attracted the notice of reliable sources unrelated to the organization or product. Notability requires only that these necessary sources have been published—even if these sources are not actually listed in the article yet (though in most cases it probably would improve the article to add them)."

This first company I am writing about works at an international level, won industry awards as Best Product of the Year in their category from an industry-leading international publication and just got $10 million Series A funding in a pandemic year--so someone other than me believes they are notable. If I can't establish verifiable evidence, I wouldn't include the company. of course. Although usually I would only first discover these companies via some type of verifiable report.

Where I am unclear and could use help: Industry Awards are "verifiable evidence" but their inclusion can sound like PR. I am not sure if I am allowed to include only the Awards I consider most notable. It seems to me if you include Awards, you list all because selection would imply "editorialization" without showing why I might believe one award is important and another not. (And while I am qualified on technology, I am have only my opinions on Awards.) So all or nothing?

I am new here and trying to find the content WP wants. This is where my expertise led me first. Sorry for the long explanation. TDCBob (talk) 13:58, 26 October 2020 (UTC)


 * Then why don't you create a list of tech companies in Belgium in general, not just "promising tech startups?" Firestar464 (talk) 02:04, 27 October 2020 (UTC)

If you think that is better for Wikipedia, I can certainly do that. My thinking had been it would be odd to have lists which include companies that have no pages on Wikipedia. But easy enough for me to execute. As a newbie, I was copying the nature and approach of similar tech companies already with pages on Wikipedia. I had no idea these were no longer the model. I'll look at a few of Wikipedia's list pages (and hope they they are still a model) and come back with a new proposal for my first page.TDCBob (talk) 14:22, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
 * So long as your motives are pure and not related to your active employer / the articles have a substantial claim to notability per WP:NCORP this should be fine. You may find help on the area at WP:BELGIUM — IVORK Talk 23:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)

New posts at the bottom
Hi, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. Your recent talk page comments were not added to the bottom of the page. New discussion page messages and topics should always be added to the bottom. Your message may have been moved. In the future you can use the "Add topic" link in the top right. For more details see the talk page guidelines. Thank you. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:05, 26 October 2020 (UTC)