User talk:Madingaizi

October 2023

Hi Madingaizi! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 09:59, 11 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the correction Belbury. It was an oversight on my side. Madingaizi (talk) 15:01, 12 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Madingaizi. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:33, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jimfbleak, I replied to you on your talk page. My request is for you to establish the basis for the conflict of interest on the Draft:FinanceGPT article I drafted as the article is based on what is on the press and direct statements from financial institutions concerned. Are the articles quoted from TechCrunch and other publications conflicted? The only instance where I went to the company's Linkedin was to support something published by BofA. It's what I could find when trying to find a second source. Madingaizi (talk) 13:06, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

I posted the COI message above because after a few minor edits you suddenly posted a full length promo for a company, so we need to know of any connection with that company.

If you have a conflict of interest, you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for an organisation, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. If you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, 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:Madingaizi. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Madingaizi|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message. Also read the following regarding writing an article:

you must provide independent verifiable sources to enable us to verify the facts and show that it meets the notability guidelines. Sources that are not acceptable include those linked to the organisation or company, press releases, YouTube, IMDB, social media and other sites that can be self-edited, logs, websites of unknown or non-reliable provenance, and sites that are just reporting what the company or organisation claims or interviewing its management. Note that references should be in-line so we can tell what fact each is supporting, and should not be bare urls

Your bare url refs were mostly to sites like Techcrunch and LinkedIn that can be self-edited or repost PR or interviews with the company bosses. Some of your refs, like this and this don't confirm what you claim.

The notability guidelines for organisations and companies have been updated. The primary criteria has five components that must be evaluated separately and independently to determine if it is met:

significant coverage in
independent,
multiple,
reliable,
secondary sources.

Note that an individual source must meet all four criteria to be counted towards notability.

Apart from the lack of proper refs, from what you tell us, the company appears to have no headquarters, staff, management structure, income or profits

You must write in a non-promotional tone. Articles must be neutral and encyclopaedic, with verifiable facts, not opinions or reviews.

Your article was "this is what we sell", "these are our awards" no real facts, just aims like FinanceGPT is designed to help companies simplify and streamline their financial analysis tasks, such as tracking financial health, making predictions on future performance, and forecasting valuations

There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.
You must not copy text from elsewhere. Copyrighted text is not allowed in Wikipedia, as outlined in this policy. That applies even to pages created by you or your organisation, unless they state clearly and explicitly that the text is public domain. We require that text posted here can be used, modified and distributed for any purpose, including commercial; text is considered to be copyright unless explicitly stated otherwise. There are ways to donate copyrighted text to Wikipedia, as described here; please note that simply asserting on the talk page that you are the owner of the copyright, or you have permission to use the text, isn't sufficient.

Before attempting to write an article again, please make sure that the topic meets the notability criteria linked above, and check that you can find independent third party sources.

If you have a conflict of interest, you must disclose the nature of that COI. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:05, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi @Jimfbleak:. I think what you raise on the tone can be corrected and this was on the basis that what I read on guidelines advised we paraphrase. I do not have a connection to the company but an interest in the topic of finance as an accountant. I joined the wikipedia community with the desire to contribute as an accountant. This morning I wanted to read more on the company because I recently started using the product and realised information on it was scattered and wanted to seize the opportunity to be the first one to write the article as my contribution to the finance discourse. I'm trying to find the code I can use to declare conflict that is not linked to the subject but my personal interests based on my profession. And on references, from what I read prior to creating the draft was that articles by the press are secondary sources. I will read more on the approach you are recommending for referencing and then correct. Please restore the draft so I can make the edits and help me properly classify my conflict as finance profesional with an interest in a technology reported to be changing how my day to day job. I also tagged it a stub so I can get help in developing it. Please also be clear if publications like TechCrunch are not credible sources, and if the reports from Ecobank and the Monetary Authority of Singapore which are based on decisions of finance experts are also not credible and factual. Madingaizi (talk) 14:31, 17 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have answered the COI query here, so that's all that's needed, although to be on the safe side perhaps you should say it on the draft talk page too. I think I've made it clear that Techcrunch is usually not seen as an independent third-party source. Newspapers are acceptable if they are view as reputable national or regional sources, so not local papers or red-tops, and if they are doing more than just quoting company sources. I'll restore the text shortly and then post a link here Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:17, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Text is here, I made these changes Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:28, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you @Jimfbleak:. I'll work on the recommendations and hope it will be able to get other contributors to help where it is. You advice is clear. Please do share access to resource where one can learn how to do some of the things you did like to the references and to also properly understand the rules. Madingaizi (talk) 15:03, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You can find some options in your own preferences tab under gadgets, more at Wikipedia:User scripts/List. I can't remember if Refill2 is always in the sidebar or if you need to add it from one of those. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:19, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FinanceGPT moved to draftspace

Thanks for your contributions to FinanceGPT. Unfortunately, I do not think it is ready for publishing at this time because it needs more sources to establish notability. I have converted your article to a draft which you can improve, undisturbed for a while.

Please see more information at Help:Unreviewed new page. When the article is ready for publication, please click on the "Submit your draft for review!" button at the top of the page OR move the page back. MarioGom (talk) 14:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:FinanceGPT

Hello, Madingaizi. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:FinanceGPT, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 15:05, 8 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: FinanceGPT (June 19)

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

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

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:FinanceGPT 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 Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Chetsford (talk) 05:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Madingaizi! Having an article draft 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! Chetsford (talk) 05:38, 19 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]