User talk:MotionMogul123

Hi MotionMogul123! I noticed your contributions to Google PageSpeed Tools and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Happy editing! TechyTommy (talk) 12:46, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks TechyTommy!

Hello, MotionMogul123, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Best practices for editors with close associations
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style
• The Teahouse, our help forum for new editors

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, 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! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 07:58, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please don't cut-and-paste articles from your sandbox, you must move them instead to preserve the history.

You said What can we do please?. Who is "we"? You have an obvious conflict of interest and you must declare it, see my previous message. I did think about blocking you outright, but you seem to have made some genuine edits, so I let it go for now. 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

• You had many unsourced claims, and some of your refs were interviews with company officials, obviously not an independent third-party source, or didn't confirm what you claim, such as the sponsorship of Ollie Bearman

• 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:

1. significant coverage in
2. independent,
3. multiple,
4. reliable,
5. secondary sources.

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

• The text is a bit of history and "this is what we do". There's little about the company itself other than locations. To show notability you need hard verifiable facts such as the number of employees, management structure, turnover or profits.

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

• I've seen worse, but we get supplies genuine, OEM... Eurospares is recognised within the automotive community for its contributions to the accessibility and maintenance of supercars worldwide... meticulous dismantling... the lifespan of working parts is extended, the company helps reduce waste in the industry, and car owners have access to cost-effective solutions. Just unverified promotional claims.

• There shouldn't be any url links in the article, only in the "References" or "External links" sections.

• You have a couple

• 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.

I didn't check.

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. Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:42, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for taking the time to give detailed criticism, I will update accordingly per the guidelines and I will address each point you have made. Before I publish it I will ask for help and a review to ensure it is helpful and adheres to the Wikipedia standards. I have also contacted an admin from the deletion page to ask for it to be retrieved so I can edit correctly. Yes regarding other articles, I do genuinely want to put/fix good content on Wiki, thank you. MotionMogul123 (talk) 10:56, 25 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please provide details of your relationship with the subject of Draft:Eurospares? This has been queried a couple of times, but you've not yet disclosed your obvious conflict of interest. Please do so now. Thank you, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:30, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I work for them on digital marketing. My understanding is I can disclose this when submitting the article. I do plan on doing this but want to ensure the article meets the expected standards before.

I have updated citations, removed text which could be seen as unverified promotional claims and added the company info box. Can you please suggest anything else? Thank you for your time. MotionMogul123 (talk) 10:46, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for responding. No, you must disclose before editing on a topic where you have a COI; this includes work in the draft or user namespaces. I will post a paid-editing message below, with instructions on how to disclose. Please make the disclosure as your very next edit. Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK I will do this ASAP, I was not aware. Thanks for being helpful and pointing this out to me. Last year I was contacted on social media by a person who said their company can get us a Wikipedia page. It was expensive and it did seem "dodgy" so did not go down that route but I wanted to do it properly. MotionMogul123 (talk) 11:03, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I have done this correct. I have added the disclosure to my user page. I am not paid for every edit. I understand that anyone can edit and improve any article I create. I want to comply with Wikipedia's paid-contribution disclosure requirements. Do I need to add the disclosure to the draft or shall I use the articles for creation process?

I appreciate your time very much, I can only begin to imagine how many users which need guidance and help. MotionMogul123 (talk) 11:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for disclosing. I've slightly edited your disclosure, removing the nowiki wrapper which prevented the template from firing; now it should operate correctly.

You may, if you wish, in addition to your user page also make a disclosure on the talk page of the Eurospares draft, but don't have to.

Just to add also that you are not allowed to publish this draft yourself, on account of your COI, and must instead go through the AfC review process. Similarly, once the article has been accepted (assuming), you aren't allowed to edit it directly, other than making obvious and non-contentious factual corrections. Instead, you can make edit requests on the article talk page, using the {{Edit COI}} template.

I'm glad you decided to give those external paid editors a wide berth. Many of them are indeed 'dodgy', as you say (obviously I don't know who contacted you, so I can't speak about them specifically), and some are downright scams (this is a real problem, unfortunately, see WP:SCAM).

Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:42, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much. If I can lean on your experience again please and ask:

1. What are my next steps with this page? Do I start the AfC review process or do nothing and wait?

2. With regards to my other edits when I work through the task centre I try to improve articles which are flagged for tone, spelling and grammar.

However, often when I check these I cannot see any mistakes. Is there anything else I need to do to "fix" the spelling, grammar, and tone issue even though I have not made an edit?

I do not recall seeing a way to mark it as done. (If I can improve a citation or something I do that as well but it is not related to the task in hand so to speak). Hope that makes sense.

---

Cheers for confirming about the paid editor route and for the link. I did not reply to them. I will search through my messages and see if I still have it and then I can report them if necessary. MotionMogul123 (talk) 12:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have submitted the Eurospares draft and it is awaiting review (along with 3,000+ others, I might add...), so in that sense you needn't do anything other than wait.

I did look through the sources, and I think they might be just about enough to show that the subject is notable in Wikipedia terms, which is the main thing reviewers check (that, and the absence of copyright violations and other major issues like that). I wouldn't say the sources show notability very unequivocally, mind, so if you have another solid source (similar to the Independent and Autocar ones), you might want to add that.

I'm not familiar with the task centre, sorry, so can't advice on it specifically. But as a general comment, if you don't find anything to correct in a given article, then just move on; no point is making unnecessary edits for the sake of making them. Sometimes articles get tagged for issues that aren't really there; or maybe the issues were there but have been already dealt with, and no one just thought to remove the maintenance tag. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:19, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much @DoubleGrazing - your interaction has been educational and motivating for me. I sincerely appreciate your input. One final question, if I can get another solid source, do I add it to the draft? (Can I edit the draft?) Or shall I post my suggestion on: Draft_talk:Eurospares? MotionMogul123 (talk) 14:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your kind words. It's my pleasure to help. :)

Yes, you can edit the draft while it's awaiting review. And yes, please do add any new sources directly into the draft, by citing the same way as you have done with the others.

Just bear in mind that our standards for sources are especially high for businesses and other organisations. For purposes of establishing notability, we don't consider any sort of sponsored content, anything based on press releases, routine business reporting (financial results, appointments, M&A, new locations or markets, partnership announcements, product launches, etc.), or interviews and anything else where someone from the company is commenting on things.

You can ping me or drop by my talk page, and I can take a look at a source before you add it, if you want. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:23, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Following your request on my talk page, I have WP:USERFIED the deleted article at User:MotionMogul123/Eurospares. Olivier (talk) 02:43, 26 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MotionMogul123. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Eurospares, 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 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:MotionMogul123. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MotionMogul123|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. DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:50, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Eurospares, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

~Kvng (talk) 20:39, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]