User talk:Udi shapiro

Welcome!

[edit]

Hello, Udi shapiro, 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! Sarsenethe/they•(talk) 01:12, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi thanks! I believe it is neutral objective and fully referenced. If you see problems with it please let me know and i will correct. Or please correct. 158.143.147.148 (talk) 05:41, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adi Shapiro (June 26)

[edit]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed. Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by KylieTastic were:
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.
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.
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.
KylieTastic (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Teahouse logo
Hello, Udi shapiro! 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! KylieTastic (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adi Shapiro (June 28)

[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 CharlieMehta 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: 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.
Charlie (talk) 03:52, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

[edit]

Information icon Hello, Udi shapiro. 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 article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adi Shapiro (June 28)

[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 Qcne 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: 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.
qcne (talk) 18:57, 28 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adi Shapiro (June 29)

[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 Fade258 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:
Some awards looks good to me but there is a lack of reliable and independent references to the subject having significant coverage about the topic. IMO - winning awards only doesn't demonstrate the notability. Your added references aren't reliable and didn't have enough coverage. YouTube is not a reliable source for it please see WP:RSPYOUTUBE. Please restore the previous reviewer decline messages and their comments. If you have any questions to ask then feel free to write on its talk page.
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.
Fade258 (talk) 12:25, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Fade258, User:Fade258
Thank you very much for your thoughtful review and detailed comments.
I have two points for your consideration:
  1. Regarding the verifiability of YouTube videos
In the case of composers, YouTube uploads often function differently from general external coverage. For most competitions mentioned, copyright remains with the composer, and standard practice is that video or audio recordings of winning pieces are given directly to the composer for their use and publication. As a result, performances are typically uploaded to the composer’s own channel rather than by the organizing body.
This applies to:
For each of these, independent primary sources confirming the competition results are provided alongside the performance video.
Regarding North London Festival, the linked page on their official website includes the announcement of her award alongside the performance.
Regarding Vienna, the prize was awarded, but the performance occurred earlier as part of the Piano at Nataf concert series. While they maintain a YouTube channel (Piano at Nataf), the specific performance was not uploaded due to technical editing limitations. If necessary for verification, I can request them to upload it formally.
Regarding Crystalline Metamorphosis (Juilliard), Juilliard provided the video directly to Adi for her use.
Regarding Demolition and Hakara, these were performed by Purcell students. The school does not upload student performances publicly but provides files to the students themselves.
I hope this clarifies why YouTube videos are referenced in this draft. They do not serve as independent secondary coverage but rather as primary evidence of the works performed, with competition results attested by the linked organizational sources.
  1. Regarding secondary source coverage
I understand the general requirement for significant independent secondary coverage. While such coverage may be forthcoming in the near future given the extraordinary nature of Adi’s achievements at her age, I respectfully note that WP:COMPOSER criterion 4 explicitly states:
“4. Has written a composition that has won (or in some cases been given a second or other place) in a major music competition not established expressly for newcomers.”
This criterion defines a sufficient condition for notability for composers and does not require independent secondary source coverage of these wins to establish notability per se.
I hope these clarifications are helpful, and I would be grateful if you could consider revising your comments accordingly.
I have restored deleted reviewers' comments.
Thank you again for your time, expertise, and consideration of this draft.
Best regards,
Udi shapiro (talk) 16:32, 29 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation

[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 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:79DD:5E9A:6A1D:B448 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.
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.
2606:9400:98A0:92A0:79DD:5E9A:6A1D:B448 (talk) 17:14, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging: @Udi shapiro 2606:9400:98A0:92A0:79DD:5E9A:6A1D:B448 (talk) 17:17, 1 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Adi Shapiro (July 14)

[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 Thilsebatti 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.
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.
Thilsebatti (talk) 16:20, 14 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]