User talk:Worktheclock

Your submission at Articles for creation: Sourcegraph (January 4)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Mattdaviesfsic 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:Sourcegraph 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&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Sourcegraph Articles for creation help desk], on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Mattdaviesfsic&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Sourcegraph reviewer's talk page] or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Mattdaviesfsic (talk) 21:28, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

January 2023
Hello Worktheclock. The nature of your edits 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:Worktheclock. 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. 331dot (talk) 15:18, 6 January 2023 (UTC)


 * Hi there 331dot - I do not have a financial stake in promoting the topic. I provide services to a company that provides services to Sourcegraph, and for this reason I was concerned about conflict of interest. I asked to advise me on how to go about proposing a page for creation, who advised "if you want a missing article to be there, you need to write it, or at least start it, yourself." I am not being compensated for my edits. Worktheclock (talk) 06:50, 8 January 2023 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your reply. There might be a slight COI here but I don't think you need to do anything differently than you are. 331dot (talk) 09:24, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Nomination of Sourcegraph for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sourcegraph, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Articles for deletion/Sourcegraph until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:02, 17 January 2023 (UTC)