User talk:Marita Dieling

Welcome!

Hello, Marita Dieling, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Fiddle Faddle 14:11, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: AIRCA (May 21)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! The submission has not been accepted because it included copyrighted information, which is not permitted on Wikipedia. You are welcome to write an article on the subject, but please do not use copyrighted work.

The existing submission may be deleted at any time. Copyrighted work cannot be allowed to remain on Wikipedia.

If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

(t) Josve05a (c) 11:23, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Marita Dieling, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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! (t) Josve05a (c) 11:23, 21 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Image without license

Unspecified source/license for File:AIRCA VECTOR LOGO.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:AIRCA VECTOR LOGO.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like {{PD-self}} (to release all rights), {{self|CC-by-sa-3.0|GFDL}} (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot ^{(Talk • Contribs • Owner)} 09:45, 17 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Marita Dieling. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Fiddle Faddle 14:12, 17 July 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

File permission problem with File:Logo of AIRCA.pdf

Thanks for uploading File:Logo of AIRCA.pdf. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read the Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:15, 18 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Teahouse talkback: you've got messages!

Hello, Marita Dieling. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Fiddle Faddle 09:25, 21 July 2014 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template).[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Marita Dieling. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 09:07, 22 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

User:Marita Dieling - please read the above carefully. Removing reliably referenced criticism is not appropriate.--ukexpat (talk) 13:52, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

AIRCA Draft

I believe the draft is very close to being acceptable. What would give it that last nudge over the line is one more truly independent source such as mainstream news, a magazine or academic journal article that discusses the organization - but it must not be simply a reproduction of a press release or information document written by AIRCA itself or one of it's member organizations. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:51, 23 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Good morning, thanks for your message. I'm afraid there is nothing (yet) in the mainstream news. The only AIRCA references that I have which are not by any of my members is the one from FAO and the one from GFAR (Global Forum for Agriculture Research). The one on Sci Dev is probably indeed the copy of a press release of one of our members. Another one I found is from Papua New Guinea http://www.nari.org.pg/node/228 Marita Dieling (talk) 07:43, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I did some editing, adding a few details and references, and then moved the page into mainspace. Congratulations! the article is now "live". Please check that I have not introduced any glaring errors, though I followed the sources closely. I have requested the Graphics workshop to tweak the logo - mainly removing the excessive whitespace around it and trim off the full title as it is redundant. You might be able to fill in some of the currently empty items in the infobox too - I put in just the bare basics. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 12:56, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

July 2014

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Association of International Research and Development Centers for Agriculture, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 14:59, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Theoadislong, thanks for your comment. I removed it because part of it is simply not correct (CGIAR doing only resesearch), but I think it can stay in if we slightly rephrase it. Marita Dieling (talk) 05:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Because of your HUGE conflict of interest, I strongly suggest you stop editing the article and instead propose your changes on the articles talk page for others to consider. Theroadislong (talk) 07:45, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to use the talk page, but the intention of my previous edit was really not at all to make AIRCA look better, but rather to rephrase a sentence about our perceived competitor (which we really see more as a partner working for the same goal, but with somewhat different means) which was not really correct. But still, thanks for your help, and I will follow your advice. Marita Dieling (talk) 08:15, 25 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral point of view and notability

Good morning all, the AIRCA article appears now with two big boxes at the top, one on neutrality and one on notability. On the first one, yes I am closely connected to the subject because I work for them, but on the other hand the article's tone seems to me to be neutral enough. On the notability, 2 editors have commented before (in teahouse), that AIRCA is a notable topic. What to do now? Thanks so much in advance for any hints, Marita Dieling (talk) 07:04, 30 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Logo of AIRCA.pdf

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Logo of AIRCA.pdf. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:41, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]