This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries.

• Note* I only occasionally log in, but do receive email notifications of postings here.
  
• Note* I have previous experience under a different username, GRUcrule, which I can no longer access.

Hi SportsGuy17! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Soni ( talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 19 January 2017 (UTC)

Hey sorry, I reached out to some editors as well who were able to contribute to the discussion. I'll look into RfC if needed, thanks for the input. Savvyjack23 ( talk) 23:18, 28 February 2017 (UTC) reply

@ Savvyjack23: No worries! Just following protocol on the WP:THIRD page, I think you're going about things the right way and suspect an RfC will help you out immensely. Sorry to be 'that guy' out of nowhere! SportsGuy17 ( talk) 16:20, 1 March 2017 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Theroadislong was:

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Linkedin.com, Amazon, forbes blogs and press releases are not reliable independent sources

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 User:SportsGuy17/sandbox 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 User:SportsGuy17/sandbox, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ Db-g7}}" 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Theroadislong ( talk) 22:16, 17 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:

This submission is not suitable for Wikipedia. Please read 'What Wikipedia is not' for more information.

 The comment the reviewer left was:

Wikipedia is not executive linkedin.

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:Debbie Qaqish 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:Debbie Qaqish, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{ Db-g7}}" 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, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusW🐶🐶F ( bark • sniff) 07:14, 18 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Hello SportsGuy17. 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:SportsGuy17. The template {{ Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=SportsGuy17|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. 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. Theroadislong ( talk) 08:31, 18 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Hey Theroadislong, I am not being compensated for this. I'm involved in the marketing space and I do think she's notable enough to warrant inclusion, especially since I see the Scott Brinker article (which I updated with some additional citations to assist with notability) and I think Qaqish has had significant impact that's borne out by the sources I'm citing.

Happy to talk about this further. My employer is noted on my profile, and I hope you see I've submitted this through the AfC process so that I'm not the one who actually takes the article live.

I also disagree with the comment "this isn't executive LinkedIn" ... she's clearly had impact in the marketing space. Obviously just because someone is an executive doesn't mean one warrants inclusion on LinkedIn (I'm familiar with the pillars, including notability and neutrality), but I think the impact is notable enough considering she pioneered a concept that continues to be seen throughout the space.

Always appreciate feedback and hope to continue the convo.

SportsGuy17 ( talk) 14:21, 18 November 2021 (UTC) reply

Your user page says "work in inbound marketing, currently at The Pedowitz Group." You are definitely deemed to be a paid editor and will need to make the full and proper disclosure on your user page. Theroadislong ( talk) 15:45, 18 November 2021 (UTC) reply

I continue to assert I am not being compensated for any work done on Wikipedia, but I understand your concerns and will add it to my page per your suggestion. Thanks! SportsGuy17 ( talk) 16:10, 18 November 2021 (UTC) reply

You have written a draft for the Chief Strategy Officer and Partner at The Pedowitz Group Draft:Debbie Qaqish, you work for the Pedowitz group, ergo you ARE absolutely considered a paid editor please make the correct disclosure on your user page. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:26, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply

You still have not adequately responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying, you may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:27, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply

My apologies, I thought I'd complied with everything. I'll take another look at your previous messages. SportsGuy17 ( talk) 19:29, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply

Theroadislong I think I'm back in compliance? Can you check? Also, do you mind taking a look at the draft of Dr. Debbie Qaqish and letting me know what you think? If it warrants being on Wikipedia, I'll re-submit for AfC consideration. If not, then I'd like to know how to delete the draft entirely and get my sandbox back. SportsGuy17 ( talk) 19:32, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply

The draft is not in your sandbox? It is here Draft:Debbie Qaqish and I can't see it being acceptable, with the sources as they are. Theroadislong ( talk) 19:40, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply

I"m an idiot, for some reason I thought the page fully redirected, obviously that's just a link. Gah. Okay, I'm not confident I can find any additional sources ... this is Wikipedia's guidelines at work (always a good thing!), so I acknowledge the page isn't notable enough. Is there a process to deleting it? (I read WP:AfC but didn't see anything). Thanks! SportsGuy17 ( talk) 20:02, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply

You can just blank it and it will be deleted. Theroadislong ( talk) 20:07, 1 December 2021 (UTC) reply