Talk:Observation.org

	This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC articles
	This article was accepted from this draft on 11 February 2024 by reviewer The Herald (talk · contribs).

Science Low‑importance

	Science portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Science on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ScienceWikipedia:WikiProject ScienceTemplate:WikiProject Sciencescience articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Biology Low‑importance

	Biology portal Observation.org is part of the WikiProject Biology, an effort to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to biology on Wikipedia. Leave messages on the WikiProject talk page.BiologyWikipedia:WikiProject BiologyTemplate:WikiProject BiologyBiology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ecology Low‑importance

	Ecology portal This article is within the scope of the WikiProject Ecology, an effort to create, expand, organize, and improve ecology-related articles.EcologyWikipedia:WikiProject EcologyTemplate:WikiProject EcologyEcology articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the importance scale.

Portals

	This page is within the scope of WikiProject Portals, a collaborative effort to improve portals on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PortalsWikipedia:WikiProject PortalsTemplate:WikiProject PortalsPortals articles
???	This article does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
	See also: List of Portals

Organizations Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Organizations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Organizations on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OrganizationsWikipedia:WikiProject OrganizationsTemplate:WikiProject Organizationsorganization articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

The following Wikipedia contributors may be personally or professionally connected to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Bikerhiker75 (talk · contribs) ([1])
Dyve (talk · contribs) This user has declared a connection. (User:Dyve)

Submission declined on 26 December 2023

I tried to improve the article mainly in terms of public perception and some other minor points. I think it should work this way.Bikerhiker75 (talk) 09:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please see WP:NCORP and WP:GNG Jeraxmoira (talk) 10:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

In my perception meanwhile there are enough reliable published secondary sources to prove notability and to match WP:NCORP and WP:GNG. What else exactly would you expect? Bikerhiker75 (talk) 06:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are related to Draft:Observation.org in any way or was recruited by User:Dyve, Please follow WP:COIEDIT and disclose the same. I would advise you to use the {{edit COI}} template to propose changes on talk pages, or by posting a note at the COI noticeboard, so that they can be peer reviewed.

To answer your question, please share your 3 best sources WP:THREE here which may help the AfC reviewer to check if they meet WP:NCORP Jeraxmoira (talk) 06:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My relationship to Observation.org is easy to explain: I am member of the Bund Naturschutz in Bayern (BN). In the BN magazine of November Observation.org was recommended as well as on the website. This way I made an account there and downloaded ObsIdentify. I found it very useful. Beeing an author on de.wikipedia for some years I noticed that there was no article yet and created one. I wrote an email to the office and asked if I could get the logo anyhow. That's how we got in contact. When this draft was declined user:Dyve asked me to help out. I agreed for the same reasons I wrote the article in the de.wikipedia: Observation deserves an article, WP should have it. I've already put in a lot of work and can assure you that nobody pays for it. I do it as a volunteer for a good cause.

I will select three sources out of the 40 and share them to WP:THREE. Bikerhiker75 (talk) 08:15, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry, but it really does not matter how much work you put in if the company/org does not meet WP:NCORP. If User:Dyve has reached out to you, then we have a conflict of interest. As instructed above, kindly disclose the same and proceed with the instructions listed on Wikipedia:COIEDIT. Thank you. Jeraxmoira (talk) 09:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As I stated above, my motivation for editing this article here is the same as to write the one on de.wikipedia. When I wrote the latter I didn't have contact to User:Dyve. My motivation is not to do a favor to User:Dyve. I consider my situation not as having a COI.

Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships.

This is not the case.

Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest.

Of course, but who is free of interest when writing. Even if I write about things I don't like, I am not free of interest, nobody is.

I won't put in the template. This would not match my self-image. Rather I'd stop working on it.

I can very well imagine that many people are searching for Observation.org on en.wikipedia as they do for iNaturalist. I can not understand why you refuse to have an article about it. Bikerhiker75 (talk) 09:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

He requested your to write it WP:EXTERNALREL. You've already made significant contributions and submitted the draft. Saying, 'Rather, I'd stop working on it,' isn't currently helping here. And no one is refusing an article about Observation.org, but it needs to meet the criteria of WP:NCORP to be on Wikipedia. Jeraxmoira (talk) 10:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I got you wrong I guess. You want me to share the 3 sources here!? Okay then:

Bikerhiker75 (talk) 09:24, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot evaluate it as I am unfamiliar with the language. Once you submit the draft, hopefully an AfC reviewer who is familiar with the language may take a look at it. Kindly disclose the COI as well. Thank you Jeraxmoira (talk) 09:35, 29 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Let's summarize the objections to the draft:

Neutrality: Beeing something like the CEO of the organization User:Dyve is assumed to be unable to write about it from a neutral position. This is absolutely okay and he recognized it as a fault to do so. Despite of that he made a good job and if somebody else had written the article it would have been nice. Consequently he asked for help. WP-users and -editors should help each other, there is nothing wrong with it.

Notability: Source No.28 alone proves the notability (in english). When the FAO invites Observation.org to take part in their research program-what else do you want in terms of notability? The guidelines WP:NCORP and WP:GNG are fulfilled.

Conflict of interest (COI): User:Dyve has disclosed it and has retired from editing the draft. For my part - I would feel rather uncomfortable if I was in one. WP:COIEDIT says: Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. Yes, but it not necessarily does WP:EXTERNALREL says: While editing Wikipedia, an editor's primary role is to further the interests of the encyclopedia. When an external role or relationship could reasonably be said to undermine that primary role, the editor has a conflict of interest... So how can you User:Jeraxmoira claim my role as editor was undermined? Only because User:Dyve asked me for help? When I created my account here you offered me help on my talk page - thank you for that! Are we staying in a COI because of that? Of course not!

Don't get me wrong. The constellation and special history of this draft makes it necessary to check for COI. I accept this completely and would expect you to do so. I honestly disclosed my relationship to User:dyve and Observation.org and cannot find a COI because I consider myself as not compromised or influenced in editing the WP. If you find evidence for COI please tell me, but not only as shortcut. I know the rules. When I wrote further up I'd rather stop editing this draft I was a bit emotional - sorry for that. In my whole professional life as a GP I was a target for many forces that wanted to drive me into a COI and I got a bit sensible about it. I consider it as pure luxury to be in an independend position and I would not give it up for nothing. Beeing independend means I don't owe anything to User:Dyve and I don't owe anything to en.wikipedia as well. So take it or leave it but please don't claim I was compromised without evidence.Bikerhiker75 (talk) 12:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please sign your message by adding four tildes at the end: "~~~~"

Relying solely on Source 28 will not be enough, I urge you to read WP:ORGCRITE again. A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. You would require multiple reliable sources to show notability (WP:THREE).

The opening paragraph of WP:COI states that "Someone having a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions, integrity, or good faith." WP:COINOTBIAS.

And by disclosing COI, you are letting other editors know about it, whenever and wherever you discuss the topic.

The COI started when User:Dyve reached out to you outside of wikipedia for help with this draft.Jeraxmoira (talk) 08:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Adding to the above, I believe I never undermined your role as a editor at any point throughout our conversation. I'd also like to note that I never asked you to stop editing this article but only follow whats outlined on WP:COIEDIT. Jeraxmoira (talk) 08:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]