User talk:AgenceNostromo

March 2021

Hello AgenceNostromo. 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:AgenceNostromo. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AgenceNostromo|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. GeneralNotability (talk) 02:13, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

About paid content

Hello, And thanks for your message. You are right, I will receive compensation for the article that I'm posting - I'm sorry, I'm new at Wikipedia, and although I knew that the fact that I get paid should be mentionned (I had the same obligation in French), I forgot to put it in. I would have a follow-up question : on the French Wikipedia (where I first submitted the page I'm currently submitting now in the english Wikipedia), such a mention - that the work was done against payment - could be specified either on the User page, or in the discussion page of the article in question (which is the solution I chose ; you can see it at https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Discussion:Philippe_Hottinguer). Is that also the case here ? Could I use the {Paid} template at the bottom of the article, or the top of the discusssion page ?

Thanks for your help !--AgenceNostromo (talk) 08:08, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of name and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions other than promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 17:07, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

AgenceNostromo (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

First of all, I apologize for the username. I used the same on the French Wikipedia, and it didn't seem to raise any issue, in part because the fact that it was a copany name was an indication that the contribution was paid for. I understand that Wikipedia is not the place for promotion or advertising ; but in this case, the contribution is paid because we are a writing company - so we wrote and translated the text. We are not, apart from the fact that we are paid a fixed amount to write the text, linked to tha page's subject and his company, nor have any stake in it. We were also careful in staying factual in the biography. As such, we are not promoting nor doing advertising for our own company, and are doing as much promotion and advertising for the page's subject and his company that the users that submitted other of his family members' pages. If I am unblocked, my contributions will be limited to eventual corrections on the pages I would have submitted ; these pages, as the one currently being reviewed, would be factual and written according to Wikipedia's guideline, and would never promote or advertise our own company.

Decline reason:

This appeal suggests that you do not adequately understand our policy concerning paid editing. _signed,Rosguill ^talk 19:58, 12 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Er, are you quite sure that you " ... are not, apart from the fact that we are paid a fixed amount to write the text, linked to tha page's subject and his company"? This page seems to tell a different story. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:24, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

We are a writing company, so we do writing work ; they have hired us in the past (that is how they know us). But I still stand by my affirmation that the content of the page is completely factual, and does not veer into opinion or advertisment. Nowhere do we say they are the best, or anything of the like ; nowhere are we comparing them to other similar companies. We stay factual throughout. He has mandated us to create, for him, his Wikipedia page (he wouldn't be the only one in his family to do so, just search the wiki), and that is what we did. As you can see from the French Wikipedia entry, we are not hiding the fact that we have been mandated to create the page - again, this is why we chose a username that clearly designated an organisation or company. And as I explained before, we are still new at this, hence my question about where the fact that is was a paid contribution could be mentionned (ideally, I would put it in the page's discussion page, as was done for the French page).--AgenceNostromo (talk) 19:40, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@AgenceNostromo: This illustrates the differences in both policy and culture between the English and French Wikipedias. On fr-wiki, users are allowed to use corporate account names if they make a disclosure about that fact. I confirmed this when I asked an experienced user there (fr:Discussion utilisateur:Mattho69#Concernant les noms d'utilisateur). On en-wiki, they are prohibited outright, unless the name is modified to refer to an individual (e.g. "Marcel at AgenceNostromo"). The policy has been debated and reaffirmed multiple times, so I doubt you will see it change here anytime soon. Until then, I am sorry but, despite your disclosures, you won't be allowed to edit on en-wiki under your current name. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 23:29, 17 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Drm310: Thanks for taking the time to check on all of this. I will request a name change according to what you just told me, and keep reading further on the policies of en-wiki. As a personal aside, I do appreciate Wikipedia a lot because of the ethical guidelines that gouvern the place and of its community, and I'm kinda glad that my first interactions on the medium, although clumsy, have put me in touch with just that. Again, thanks for your help !--AgenceNostromo (talk) 14:08, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Philippe Hottinguer (March 10)

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

This is unambiguous paid promotion (see discussion at User talk:AgenceNostromo‎), and Wikipedia does not tolerate promotion of any kind.

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:Philippe Hottinguer 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:Philippe Hottinguer, 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.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, AgenceNostromo! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:45, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Philippe Hottinguer

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Draft:Philippe Hottinguer, 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 Wikipedia: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 deleting administrator. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:46, 10 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Philippe Hottinguer

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

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!} 20:47, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]