User talk:JanaPrag

Welcome!

Hello, KetaDesign!

Welcome to Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Getting Started

Tutorial
Learn everything you need to know to get started.

Introduction to contributing

The Teahouse
Ask questions and get help from experienced editors.

The Task Center
Learn what Wikipedians do and discover how to help.

Tips

Don't be afraid to edit! Just find something that can be improved and make it better. Other editors will help fix any mistakes you make.
It's normal to feel a little overwhelmed, but don't worry if you don't understand everything at first—it's fine to edit using common sense.
If an edit you make is reverted, you can discuss the issue at the article's talk page. Sign your messages with four tildes (~~~~), be civil, and don't restore the edit unless there is consensus.
When adding new content to an article, always include a citation to a reliable source.
If you wish to edit about a subject with which you are affiliated, read our conflict of interest guide and disclose your connection.
Have fun! Your presence in the Wikipedia community is welcome.

Happy editing! Cheers, Comr Melody Idoghor (talk) 22:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Madison's Lumber Reporter (July 2)

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

This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

The comment the reviewer left was:

None of the source provided (except the ISSN database entry) appear to actually mention the publication.

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:Madison's Lumber Reporter 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:Madison's Lumber Reporter, 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 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.

Stuartyeates (talk) 10:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, KetaDesign! 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! Stuartyeates (talk) 10:43, 2 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Madison's Lumber Reporter (September 20)

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

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources.

This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Unsourced statements need to be sourced or removed.

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:Madison's Lumber Reporter 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.

Greenman (talk) 17:19, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

February 2023

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. 331dot (talk) 22:16, 9 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

Oh dear, I openly declared myself as having an interest in this company right from the start, please don't think that I am trying to get away with something User:KetaDesign I will register a different user name and otherwise follow the directions above.

I looked very carefully at other Wikipedia pages for publishers and information sources, of which there are many. In following previous editor's instructions, and in order to avoid the sense of this page being an "advertisement", I was just about to edit this page to make the language "the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article"

I list these changes below for your consideration:

Madison's Lumber Reporter is a Canadian-based weekly forest industry guide providing softwood lumber commodity price information.

The publication[1] was established in 1952 by Peter Madison, in Vancouver, BC. The periodical tracks the current North American home building and construction framing softwood lumber and panel market 50 weeks out of the year.

History

Madison's Lumber Reporter started as an 8-page newsletter covering the various softwood species[2], products [3], sizes [4] and grades [5]. The first issue was September 15, 1952. In 1973 Peter Madison sold the company to Laurence Cater. Laurie and Peter worked together for five years. Over time Laurie took on Editor John Freisen and in the early 1980s Madison's hired Zara Heartwood as Market Analysis Editor. In the 1990s, Ward Johnson became Editor. By then the newsletter had grown to 12-pages, full of weekly lumber market and price data for the forest industry and anyone interested in the latest building materials information.

Academic publishing

Madison's Lumber Reporter is co-author of an academic paper, exploring the impact of duty rates from the 2006 Softwood Lumber Agreement on the North American lumber market: Province specific impacts of the 2006 United States-Canada Softwood Lumber Agreement: A seemingly unrelated regression approach -6

Business intelligence

Madison's Lumber Reporter data and market commentary is used by forest industry players -- including retailers of wood products -- across North America to help make informed decisions about their company operations. The weekly insight is also used by banks and financial analysts to assess macroeconomic conditions and provide wisdom to their readers. In addition, governments, universities, agencies, as well as ports, railways, and other logistics providers include Madison's data when making their operational plans. As the main cost input into residential construction, lumber price data is also widely used by home builders, whether small contractors or large housing construction companies. KetaDesign (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You declared a COI, but your username suggests to me that you must make the stricter paid editing disclosure, a Terms of Use requirement. You may request unblock as instructed above. You will need to make a request that proposes a new username, do not create a new account, which would be block evasion. 331dot (talk) 01:00, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your explanation, I was just about to create another account. I will make a request that proposes a new username. KetaDesign (talk) 01:14, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, sorry to bother you but I don’t know if I did my unblock request correctly? I have not received any reply over this past month so I’m wondering if there is something else I am supposed to do? Tx. KetaDesign (talk) 19:43, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Change in Username

deleted due to trolls, I redid my request to change username as instructed by other editors KetaDesign (talk) 01:20, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, will do. Someone else left a comment which is also deleted . . . Weird. KetaDesign (talk) 16:30, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@KetaDesign Please ignore those comments left by troll accounts. TheManInTheBlackHat (Talk) 17:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. I guess I have to change my username though. KetaDesign (talk) 00:51, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

KetaDesign, please ignore the deleted comments. It's a user trying to mess with you. I've protected your talk page to prevent this from happening for the foreseeable future. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 17:13, 10 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thanks so much, it seemed like it wasn’t right to me. KetaDesign (talk) 00:50, 11 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you may have misunderstood. Look through all the comments you see now on your talk page—they are all valid. The trolling ones were all removed around two minutes after posting. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 20:05, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok sorry . . . So do I continue with my request for a name change? Somewhere someone said I need to create a new account. Thanks for helping me understand. KetaDesign (talk) 20:10, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You should definitely not create a new account. Continue following the instructions in the yellow box here. I realise this may be confusing, but all of the content currently on your talk page was not written by trolls. DatGuy^Talk_Contribs 20:26, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thanks! At the root of my confusion is this outright global block . . . I had declared my “Conflict of Interest” when I started this Page draft. I didn’t even know there was another level of declaration.

Now I can’t continue with valid edits I was making to other pages (Ie: Lumber) Thanks again. KetaDesign (talk) 20:33, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again, sorry to bother you but I don’t know if I did my unblock request correctly? I have not received any reply over this past month so I’m wondering if there is something else I am supposed to do? Tx. KetaDesign (talk) 19:44, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock / Change Username

resubmitted because in my previous request I missed the list of required responses. apologies. KetaDesign (talk) 19:42, 13 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock / Change Username

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

JanaPrag (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

JanaPrag (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

(resubmitted because in my previous request I missed the list of required responses. apologies.)

“Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement.”

I am the owner of the company I made this draft page about. From the very start I disclosed my Conflict of Interest. I didn’t know there was another level of disclosure. I don’t get any compensation for making the Wiki page. I just wanted to provide an easy source for people looking for this information.

“Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.”

As I understand it, the issue arose because my Wiki username is the same as my incorporated company name. Actually I became a Wiki editor before I owned the company. My name is Keta. KetaDesign is an online name I use often (my Facebook Page, elsewhere). I wasn’t trying to get away with anything. As noted in my draft, this data is cited by various credible and reputable sources like Natural Resources Canada, Statistics Canada, BC Government, Government of Quebec. My intention was purely to make this information easy for people to find.

“Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.”

I would like to continue editing Wiki pages on subjects of which I have knowledge, such as bald eagles and lumber. Please allow my change in username so I can continue with my draft and keep editing. KetaDesign (talk) 22:26, 16 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Renamed; accepting per below, with the following restriction: You may not edit about yourself or any entity you have a financial connection to, except through WP:AfC (for article creation, desisting on any draft that is rejected outright) and the edit request process (for articles already in mainspace). Please let me know if you have any questions about the scope of this sanction. Thank you for your patience amidst the current unblock backlog, and happy editing. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 08:34, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. I've unprotected your talkpage in hopes that protection is no longer necessary. If disruption resumes, please let me know or go to WP:RFPP/I. -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 08:41, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Question: Would you be willing to agree to not edit about yourself or any entity you have a financial relationship with, as a condition of unblock? -- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 23:29, 4 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, thank you so much. Once the page I submitted, including edits I still need to do per earlier suggestions, is approved I would agree to further not edit.

Question: in the future if something changes with the company, is there a way I can submit an edit (not doing it myself)?

thanks! KetaDesign (talk) 00:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Given that the draft wasn't spam, I think that's a reasonable exception—with the caveat that it would cease to apply if the draft is ever rejected. (AfC has two levels of "no": decline, which means "not now" and which is what you've had twice, and reject, which means "not anytime in the foreseeable future".)

@331dot: Would you have any objection to an unblock on the following conditions?

Financial COI disclosure (already handled)
Rename
Restriction to draftspace and the edit-request system for all edits with a financial COI

-- Tamzin^{[cetacean needed]} (she|they|xe) 06:16, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine with me, thanks. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both SO MUCH.

I am now editing and resubmitting the Madison's draft page. Once it is accepted I will not edit. If there will be an edit in the future I will submit through edit request as directed.

Now that I am re-instated, I will go back to helping with the Lumber page content. Tx! JanaPrag (talk) 16:36, 5 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § Paid editors

{{paid|user=KetaDesign|employer=Madison’sLumberReporter|client=KetaDesign}}

Hello, I am doing this again because (I guess?) I didn’t do it right before:

“Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement.”

I am the owner of the company I made this draft page about. From the very start I disclosed my Conflict of Interest. I didn’t know there was another level of disclosure, which I will put at the top of my Draft page as required once I am able to edit. I don’t get any compensation specifically for making the Wiki page. I just wanted to provide an easy source for people looking for lumber price information.

“Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.”

As I understand it, the issue arose because my Wiki username is the same as my incorporated company name. Actually I became a Wiki editor before I owned the company. My name is Keta. KetaDesign is an online name I use often (my Facebook Page, elsewhere). I wasn’t trying to get away with anything. As noted in my draft, this data is cited by various credible and reputable sources like Natural Resources Canada, Statistics Canada, BC Government, Government of Quebec. My intention was purely to make this information easy for people to find.

“Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.”

I would like to continue editing Wiki pages on subjects of which I have knowledge, such as bald eagles and lumber.

Please allow my change in username so I can continue with my draft and keep editing.

KetaDesign (talk) 19:41, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The {{paid}} disclosure belongs on your userpage; I have copied it there as a courtesy. Your unblock and rename request will be considered when an administrator has time to look at it. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:57, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

oh thank you so much for your help! This is confusing. Tx. KetaDesign (talk) 22:45, 14 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh whups, oh no: the Conflict is only for my Draft page about “Madison’s Lumber Reporter”. All my other Wiki contributions have been strictly voluntary (nothing to do with the company). Tx. KetaDesign (talk) 00:09, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I’ve made the correction, so I think it should be accurate now. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 06:48, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Oh thank you so so much :-D I can’t edit anything right now :-/ KetaDesign (talk) 16:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your unblock request is still open and therefore the decision is still pending. Unfortunately there are way more admin tasks than admins to do them, so your request may not be responded to for some time. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:24, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Thanks! Will just wait :-/ KetaDesign (talk) 22:08, 15 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Madison's Lumber Reporter (September 22)

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

The comment the reviewer left was:

The listed sources do not talk about the company in an in-depth fashion. They only cite the publication, with no other context given about this publication. I removed some sources that does not even mention this company. Please cite independent sources for the history sections and unsourced claims.

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:Madison's Lumber Reporter 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.

Ca ^{talk to me!} 13:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Ca Hello, Thank you so much. I intended to make the page about the publication (rather than the company). That's why I was using those particular references. The publication is called "Madison's Lumber Reporter" . . . the content would fit here: Category:Lists of publications

Please let me know if I still need to make all the edits listed above.

JanaPrag (talk) 17:58, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Madison's Lumber Reporter (April 18)

Your recent article submission has been rejected and cannot be resubmitted. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Xkalponik was: This submission is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. The comment the reviewer left was: Despite 3 previous comments from reviewers while declining it urged to introduce sources to sections/statements that were uncited, the creator hadn't complied. Given that the user has already declared a COI, this draft warranted a thorough evaluation, and each reviewer was unsatisfied with the sourcing, quality, depth, and also lack of them. Despite multiple instructions on introducing sources, the creator just kept re-submitted without obliging.

Moreover, the sources inserted are mostly passing mentions, no in-depth analysis of the company whatsoever is noticeable on the internet even via my own research. In some rare instances, a publication can be considered notable if it is cited/mentioned by reputable pubs substantially/regularly. Which is also not the case here.

Given the sensitivity of this draft, a reject was imminent from the start if instructions weren't followed.

X (talk) 15:00, 18 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Xkalponik

Hi, thanks so much for your review. This is my first effort to start a Wiki page and I suppose I was being too cautious in the content.

I did comply with the previous comments to introduce more sources; in my last edit even adding a new section with additional third-party publishing about the company which were not there before. I accept the rejection, but I wanted to clarify that I had not been resubmitting ("three times") without complying to comments about clarifying sources.

Also, the previous editor @Ca had removed sources which DO mention the company (as credits for the weekly data updates featured on those websites). It took me a while to figure out what had been changed and to add them back. My sense is that that previous editor took a cursory look at the websites noted and -- upon not seeing the credit notations at the bottom of the tables -- summarily removed.

It seems like some of the comments left here by previous editors have impugned this final decision to not allow the company a Wiki page. I understand that there is a lot of work being done by volunteers and I appreciate that. I just want to be clear that I WAS complying with instructions.

JanaPrag (talk) 16:09, 19 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]