User talk:PedroTheHamster

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello PedroTheHamster! Your additions to Draft:Experimental organisational development have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably free and compatible copyright license—to request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission. While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, it's important to understand and adhere to guidelines about using information from sources to prevent copyright and plagiarism issues. Here are the key points:

• Limited quotation: You may only copy or translate a small portion of a source. Any direct quotations must be enclosed in double quotation marks (") and properly cited using an inline citation. More information is available on the non-free content page. To learn how to cite a source, see Help:Referencing for beginners.
• Paraphrasing: Beyond limited quotations, you are required to put all information in your own words. Following the source's wording too closely can lead to copyright issues and is not permitted; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when paraphrasing, you must still cite your sources as appropriate.
• Image use guidelines: In most scenarios, only freely licensed or public domain images may be used and these should be uploaded to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. In some scenarios, non-freely copyrighted content can be used if they meet all ten of our non-free content criteria; Wikipedia:Plain and simple non-free content guide may help with determining a file's eligibility.
• Copyrighted material donation: If you hold the copyright to the content you want to copy, or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license the text for publication here. Please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• Copying and translation within Wikipedia: Wikipedia articles can be copied or translated, however they must have proper attribution in accordance with Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. For translation, see Help:Translation § Licensing.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices. Persistent failure to comply may result in being blocked from editing. If you have any questions or need further clarification, please ask them here on this page, or leave a message on my talk page. Thank you. The4lines |||| (talk) 16:07, 11 July 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. I had merely saved the direct quote as a note to paraphrase it later on whilst drafting up the article. It should all be good now. :) PedroTheHamster (talk) 11:09, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Arjan Kozica (July 20)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Caleb Stanford was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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:Arjan Kozica 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.

Caleb Stanford (talk) 17:15, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Dear Caleb,

Thank you for your review. Could you give me any more feedback on the reason it does not fit the criteria, or why not? "WP:NACADEMIC likely not met. For reference see Google Scholar." does not really give me any information at all beyond saying "No". PedroTheHamster (talk) 11:06, 21 July 2025 (UTC)

Courtesy ping @Caleb Stanford qcne (talk) 10:29, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Hi @PedroTheHamster: I won't see replies unless you ping my username - you can do that with {{ping|Caleb Stanford}}. Happy to answer any questions you have! I would recommend you start by reading the criteria at WP:NACADEMIC carefully (particularly under "Specific criteria notes") - reviewers will want to see proof that a specific criterion is satisfied. You can post your thoughts as a comment on your draft at Draft:Arjan Kozica. Caleb Stanford (talk) 17:11, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Hello, PedroTheHamster! 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! Caleb Stanford (talk) 17:15, 20 July 2025 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: sandbox (July 26)

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

qcne (talk) 10:25, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I have already submitted those 3 as drafts and just wanted to back them up in my own sandbox, to work on, and if some rogue editor deletes the articles including history. Has happened before... Apparently I can't make 3 sandboxes, so all in one. PedroTheHamster (talk) 15:38, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

You can make 3 sandboxes, they're just subpages titled whatever you want from your user account:

> User:PedroTheHamster/sandbox1

> User:PedroTheHamster/sandboxtwo

> User:PedroTheHamster/sandboxwhatever

When you backed up the draft content to your sandbox, you included the Pending review code, so they appeared in the Articles for Creation review pile. qcne (talk) 15:41, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Oh, that's both great to know, thank you, and a big Oopsie on my part. Sorry! Stunning that it was reviewed within hours, though. PedroTheHamster (talk) 16:08, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

No probs. :) qcne (talk) 16:09, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Actually, since you're a very experienced editor, could you have a looksie at my main draft, to see whether it even has any chance of being accepted? I put a lot, lot, lot of work into these three (the research field and two main researchers)… If there is something I could improve, that would be awesome to know! (Draft:Experimental organisational development).

Either way, a great weekend to you, though, sir! :) PedroTheHamster (talk) 19:14, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

I've had a look, @PedroTheHamster but unfortunately I am certainly not an expert in business concepts. I don't see any issues in your prose, but I am slightly concerned there may be Wikipedia:Synthesis in the draft: for example I couldn't see clear evidence Netflix, Uber, Amazon, Airbnb, Microsoft used ExOD.

I'll also note Medium.com generally isn't a reliable source unless the person writing the Medium entry is a known subject matter expert. qcne (talk) 21:14, 26 July 2025 (UTC)

Awesome, thank you! I'll try to get those things fixed PedroTheHamster (talk) 09:15, 27 July 2025 (UTC)