User talk:Rlambert327

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Rlambert327, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Centerstone, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content protocols, and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are struck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at the our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions ask me on my talk page or you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! DGG ( talk ) 01:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Centerstone[edit]

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:Centerstone, 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. DGG ( talk ) 01:19, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. That doesn't mean you can write what you like, you must follow the guidance below:

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
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.

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

Reply[edit]

Who is we? You are not allowed to edit on behalf of an organisation, only as an individual. I've posted detailed guidance above, and if you do another draft I'll comment on it if requested.

Your former version was largely referenced to your own or affiliated websites, not independent third party sources

You concentrated, as do most promos, on services and awards, not on what makes the organisation notable. It appears to have no income or expenditure, and the claim of 4000 staff is unsourced

Every thing is "offered", rather than sold, and is promotionally phrased using the most advanced technology and treatment methods... offers a full continuum of mental health and substance use disorder treatments, as well as a wide-array of specialized wrap-around services

The list of supposed awards looks spammy in itself, and none of the awards appear to be notable enough to have a Wikipedia article

Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:40, 10 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Centerstone has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Centerstone. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Centerstone (August 6)[edit]

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

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

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:Centerstone 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:Centerstone, 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, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Rlambert327! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 16:38, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing[edit]

Hello Rlambert327. 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 SEO.

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:Rlambert327. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rlambert327|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. Theroadislong (talk) 16:50, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Theroadislong: I have a conflict of interest notice stated on my rlambert327 user page.

Which doesn't mention you being paid. Theroadislong (talk) 17:00, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Theroadislong: OK. I went ahead and added that disclosure. I work full-time for Centerstone and am not necessarily paid to do anything related to Wikipedia, but just doing for my job as a whole. Is there room to discuss improving the page to where it can be approved?Rlambert327 (talk) 17:17, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rlambert327: Editing their Wikipedia page while working for them is pretty much the definition of paid editing. Thank you for your user page disclosure.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:04, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ThatMontrealIP Thanks for your comment and edits. I'm also looking for any feedback on edits I can make to make this article meeting the standards for publishing. Thanks!

AfC notification: Draft:Centerstone has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Centerstone. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 17:26, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Centerstone (August 8)[edit]

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reasons left by DGG were: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia. This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: promotional press release for non-notable organization

DGG ( talk ) 21:36, 8 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Concern regarding Draft:Centerstone[edit]

Hello, Rlambert327. I just wanted to let you know that Draft:Centerstone, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Draft space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for article space.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion under CSD G13. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it. You may request userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available here.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. Bot0612 (talk) 03:02, 13 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your draft article, Draft:Centerstone[edit]

Hello, Rlambert327. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Centerstone".

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!} 06:52, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]