User talk:Matthijsoudkerk

Welcome[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate your contributions; however, it appears you may have written a Wikipedia article about yourself. Creating an autobiography is strongly discouraged – please see our guideline on writing autobiographies. If you create such an article, it may be deleted. If what you have done in life is genuinely notable and can be verified according to our policy for articles about living people, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later (see Wikipedians with articles). If you wish to add to or change an existing article about yourself, you are welcome to propose the changes by visiting the article's talk page. Please understand that this is an encyclopedia and not a personal web space or social networking site. If your article has already been deleted, please see: Why was the page I created deleted?, and if you feel the deletion was an error, please discuss this with the deleting administrator. Thank you.--VViking_TalkEdits 13:38, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matthijs Oudkerk (September 30)[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 TheAafi was:

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.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Please see WP:STYLE and fix the draft.

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:Matthijs Oudkerk 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:Matthijs Oudkerk, 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, 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.

─ The Aafī (^talk) 17:26, 30 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Matthijsoudkerk. 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 or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} 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 WP:Spam);
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. 331dot (talk) 14:03, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Paid editing?[edit]

Hello Matthijsoudkerk. 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 search-engine optimization.

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:Matthijsoudkerk. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Matthijsoudkerk|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) 14:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Matthijs Oudkerk has a new comment[edit]

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Matthijs Oudkerk. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 14:18, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Matthijs Oudkerk (December 30)[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'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 (see the guidelines on the notability of people). 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:

decline correct declaration has not been made about paid editing and no improvement in reference format.

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:Matthijs Oudkerk 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:Matthijs Oudkerk, 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, 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.

Theroadislong (talk) 14:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Matthijsoudkerk! 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) 14:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020[edit]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

Orange Mike | Talk 19:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

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

Request reason:

The edits for the page were done by the Institute for Diagnostic Accuracy (iDNA), a privately organized research institute situated in Groningen, The Netherlands. Mr. Oudkerk did not pay iDNA for the edits. Mr. Oudkerk is affiliated with iDNA and he asked iDNA to help him with the page. We are proud of the work of Mr. Oudkerk and we feel that he did a remarkebly job in his working life on adding to the scientific knowledge of thoracic imaging. Therefore, iDNA feels that he deserves to be listed on Wikipedia, a platform that we consider as a hallmark for independent and high quality accurate information. That is why we honoured his request for our unpaid assistance. Mr. Oudkerk checked and approved all the edits.

Hopefully this information is helpful to unblock our account. After this, we will add additional references to further back up the claims on the page.

Please let us know your response. Matthijsoudkerk (talk) 09:56, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

First, group accounts are not permitted on the English Wikipedia; each account must be exclusively operated by a single individual who may grant no one else access. You will need to designate a single person to operate this account. Second, if you are not Mr. Oudkerk, you will need to propose a new username as you cannot use his name if you aren't him. Third, you don't have to be paid by Mr. Oudkerk to be a paid editor, if you work for your organization, you are a paid editor, you don't have to be specifically paid for your specific edits. Either way, you have a conflict of interest. Lastly, whether someone "deserves" to be on Wikipedia is not relevant; we are only interested in summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how that topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Wikipedia is not a place to honor or recognize someone for their work no matter how good it might be. It's also not relevant if the subject of an article approves of the edits or not, since Wikipedia summarizes what independent sources say. The approval of the subject is not required. You won't be unblocked to, in the short term at least, make further edits related to your conflict of interest. If that is your only goal here, there is nothing more to be done about this matter. If you are interested in being a general, individual contributor, please tell what topics unrelated to your conflict of interest you might edit about. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Thank you 331dot for your explanation. Our only intent was to create a page about Mr. Oudkerk that could be verified and substantiated by independent sources. We did not want to violate any regulations of Wikipedia. But now we have a half finished page that can be found on Wikitia and we have no rights anymore to edit the page. How can I remove the page? I will also ask for a change of the username. Thank you for your help. Matthijsoudkerk (talk) 14:33, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikitia is a separate project from Wikipedia; we cannot help you with issues there. 331dot (talk) 17:00, 9 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

331dot, I tried to change the username, but I received a response that this is not possible beceause the account has been blocked. Can you temporarily unblock the account, so I can change the username? I have the feeling that I am moving in circles here, so I hope that you would be willing to help me out on this.

Please make an unblock request that proposes a new username. 331dot (talk) 09:55, 16 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

rename[edit]

Per the UTRS thread, UTRS appeal #40841 I can rename you. You can copy this, fill it out and paste it to your talk page. (remove the "pre" tags or it won't work.

{{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}}

--Deepfriedokra (talk) 09:02, 26 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021[edit]

UTRS decline

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. Please describe in greater detail how your editing was unconstructive and how you would edit constructively if unblocked. ( Please read Wikipedia's Guide to appealing blocks for more information. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Guide_to_appealing_blocks) As you still have access to your talk page, please post your unblock request to your user talk page, omitting any off-Wiki personally identifying information. If you have not already done so, please place the following at the bottom of your talk page, filling in "Your reason here "

 {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you for your attention to these matters. Please see UTRS appeal #40841. You must deal with your apparent undisclosed paid editing. As I've said, renaming is a separate issue. I've left the template for you to request renaming and unblocking below. You can deal with both at once. Or you can just tell us what knew user name you would like. I would be happy to rename you.

--Deepfriedokra (talk) 12:11, 28 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]