User talk:Netwebweaver

November 2024

Hello Netwebweaver. 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Netwebweaver. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Netwebweaver|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. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is a standard message to notify contributors about an administrative ruling in effect. It does not imply that there are any issues with your contributions to date.

You have shown interest in blockchain and cryptocurrencies. Due to past disruption in this topic area, the community has authorised uninvolved administrators to impose contentious topics restrictions—such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks—on editors who do not strictly follow Wikipedia's policies, expected standards of behaviour, or the page-specific restrictions, when making edits related to the topic.

For additional information, please see the guidance on these sanctions. If you have any questions, or any doubts regarding what edits are appropriate, you are welcome to discuss them with me or any other editor.

331dot (talk) 08:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not paid to submit a 'pepecoin' article. At all. Netwebweaver (talk) 09:08, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

How did you come to edit about this crypto? 331dot (talk) 09:10, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It showed up on my feed on reddit and I thought it was a cool crypto. Didn't see a wikipedia page on it so I thought it should be submitted. I appreciated it was open source. Netwebweaver (talk) 09:13, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. It raises suspicion when the first edit someone makes is well formatted and is about a controversial topic area known for disruption(see the above message in the box) As I said on the draft, it is a long way from being an acceptable article. You only offer a single source, and it just tells of the existence of this crypto and its features. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. "Significant coverage" is that which goes into detail about what the sources see as important/significant/influential about the topic.

Creating articles is the most difficult task to perform on Wikipedia, and it's even harder in a topic area under sanctions. It's highly recommended that you first gain experience and knowledge by editing existing articles in less controversial topic areas that interest you, as well as using the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 09:22, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah it seems like you blocked me from editing it further. I did fix it and added more links. I just used Claude.ai to do all the formatting for me. I creased a basic pdf file with some information I pulled. and asked it to turn it into wikipedia code. It looked okay and I just press submit. Netwebweaver (talk) 09:25, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have issued no blocks. You need to click the "submit your draft for review!" button to submit the draft. You just made your 11th edit so you are now autoconfirmed- perhaps that is what you refer to- but as this is your first attempt at an article, it is highly recommended that you submit it via the review process.

Take great care in using AI to make edits- it can be problematic for various reasons, see WP:LLM. 331dot (talk) 09:29, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried. It just refreshes. You did something. Netwebweaver (talk) 09:32, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you able to edit any other articles or pages? Try editing your user page or the WP:SANDBOX. 331dot (talk) 09:36, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Draft:Pepecoin

Is this not a draft for review? This is overtly complicated. Wikipedia needs a rewrite. Netwebweaver (talk) 09:46, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I never knew about this "notable" standard. guess ill stop donating to wikipedia and giving it my free time. Good luck with the site. Netwebweaver (talk) 09:50, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you donate or not is your decision and has no impact on how day to day matters are conducted here- the Foundation collects the money, not us editors. Yes, there is criteria for inclusion, that criteria has made Wikipedia one of the most visited websites on this planet. There are other websites with less stringent requirements if you just want to tell the world about this crypto. 331dot (talk) 09:52, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You don't need the whole url; I fixed this. It is a draft, but you need to submit it for a review. In the box at the top of the draft that says "Draft article not currently submitted for review", there is a blue button at the bottom of that box that says "Submit your draft for review!". If you click that a screen comes up asking you to classify your draft and then submit it. 331dot (talk) 09:49, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]