User talk:HildebrandoFCF

  1. Home
  2. Wiki

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, HildebrandoFCF, 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, which will be reviewed by other editors. 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:

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! 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:33, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Migdal Filmes (April 15)

[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 draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:
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.
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.
Theroadislong (talk) 21:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, Theroadislong, will change the text, ok? HildebrandoFCF (talk) 22:25, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Theroadislong. Thanks for reviewing. I actually did this:
"2025-04-16 14:40 Diff · History -729 I inserted all the links I already had in the Brazilian version, and removed compliments."
So, no, I didn't send again the last version without changing anything. I wouldn't do that, since you told me not to. It was actually a big change, since all the 70 links about the movies, television series, and screenwriter works were linked to Brazilian Wikipedia pages, none of which I created.
As for the references, from the 14 references I inserted, 6 are from news organizations, including the largest news organization in Brazil, Globo, or G1. If I search exactly "Migdal Filmes", in Google, I receive 126,000 results. It is one of the largest (if not the largest) audiovisual production companies in my country, pretty much respected and a cause for improvements in the cinema industry in Brazil. That's me speaking, ok? I'm an IT guy, hired as a freelancer to do this job, so I don't have any connections to the company. I just understand that it is, without doubt, a very important company to the film industry to my country. What they want is only to be cataloged and have the proper visibility through Wikipedia. It is far from being a Universal, but it is already working with Paramount and Universal itself (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/My_Mom_Is_a_Character_3). So, I don't honestly know what to do more than this. Maybe increase the number of references, but I think it is moot, since the ones the ones I mentioned are pretty good and independent, created by reporters.
So, I still ask you, what do I have to do to make it a credible entry in the encyclopedia? HildebrandoFCF (talk) 12:29, 17 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, @Theroadislong. I would just like to clarify that it's not accurate to say I resubmitted with no improvements. I made many changes to the page since the previous version, including:
  • A complete restructuring of the text;
  • Addition of independent and reliable sources;
  • Rewriting promotional content into neutral tone;
  • Grammar and style corrections;
  • Removal of inappropriate or redundant material.
If any of these changes are still insufficient, I’m completely open to specific suggestions for further improvement. My goal is to contribute positively to the encyclopedia. Thank you! HildebrandoFCF (talk) 00:16, 14 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, HildebrandoFCF! 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! Theroadislong (talk) 21:54, 15 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

AfC notification: Draft:Migdal Filmes has a new comment

[edit]
I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:Migdal Filmes. Thanks! Theroadislong (talk) 19:21, 16 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Migdal Filmes (June 7)

[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 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:
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 sources only discuss the company's movies and does not discuss the company itself. This lack of coverage is reflected in the draft as some sentences lack sources.
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.
Ca talk to me! 09:37, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Ca! This is the best comment I've seen: "The sources only discuss the company's movies and does not discuss the company itself. This lack of coverage is reflected in the draft as some sentences lack sources." It ADDS to my work, and doesn't make me sad or angry like: "Since yiou are a paid editor please learn your trade before submitting drafts". If this guy only knew English, by the way. I'm a freelancer, yes, and I get paid to create articles in Wikipedia, and had no problems so far (https://www.99freelas.com.br/user/hildebrando.castro). I will thoroughly read the whole article once again, and include everything I possibly can to make it better. You see, this is a major Brazilian film maker company, and this article had no issues here in Brazil or in the Spanish world, because it is known here and there. HildebrandoFCF (talk) 16:41, 8 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Iafa Britz (June 9)

[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 Timtrent 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:
Your referencing makes it impossible to verify any notability. P"Lease read and apply WP:REFB and WP:CITE

"[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]" all in a row in the References section is helpful to us and useless to you

Since yiou are a paid editor please learn your trade before submitting drafts
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.
🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:29, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

As a paid editor you are expected as part of your remuneration to abide by all of the rules. You are paid to discover, learn, understand, and implement all relevant rules, policies, and procedures. Further, you are paid to write neutral and correctly referenced prose which passes these criteria. This is an amateur project. Amateur editors do not generally feel the need to assist paid editors to receive their pay.

I am not averse to good paid editors. If you can write good, neutral, well referenced prose as a draft and submit it for review and acceptance, and receive payment for doing so, then good for you. I welcome you here

However

If you want to use the WP:AFC process to submit your draft more than once, thinking in your error that we will help you get paid, then you have another think coming.

If you are unable to create a draft that requires more than one corrective review, then I do not welcome you here. The only advice I will offer will be within my reviews. I will not otherwise help you to get paid.

If you create your draft as a live article or move your draft to become a live article, then you will discover how unwise this step was. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please deploy the declaration of paid editing according to WP:PAID on your user page. That is part of what you are paid to know. 🇵🇸‍🇺🇦 FiddleTimtrent FaddleTalk to me 🇺🇦‍🇵🇸 17:31, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Migdal Filmes (August 15)

[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 RangersRus 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:
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.
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.
RangersRus (talk) 19:36, 15 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]