User talk:Danilo Two

Archives

/Archive 1

Hello Danilo Two. 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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 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 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:Danilo Two. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Danilo Two|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.
I note your comment about employment and COI on your user page. This is the formal question to ask you to state formally that you are a paid editor. It gives you the form to choose. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 10:24, 18 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

@Timtrent: Thanks for your message. I added {{paid}}, per your note, to go alongside the other disclosure on my user page. Danilo Two (talk) 13:41, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Thank you. It is the very best way to declare this 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 19:51, 21 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Feel free to message me if you are requesting more edits to Cedars-Sinai. Julian in LA (talk) 18:52, 5 January 2026 (UTC)Reply

Eduardo Marbán, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. This is a great rating for a new article, and places it among the top 23% of accepted submissions — kudos to you! You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

scope_creep^Talk 19:51, 2 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Scope creep: Thanks! Danilo Two (talk) 20:44, 2 February 2026 (UTC)Reply

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

This is a courtesy notice. You are not required to respond. Here is the link: Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Cedars-Sinai_Medical_Center Julian in LA (talk) 19:26, 2 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Danilo Two: Is there a need to give the religion section less prominence by including it in the merger section? Julian in LA (talk) 21:13, 6 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hi Julian, I believe it all comes down to sourcing. I suggested adding the Jewish heritage content in the merger section because it was mentioned within that context in independent sourcing. In order to add more or give it its own section, I believe more sourcing would be needed. Danilo Two (talk) 13:54, 7 May 2026 (UTC)Reply

Draft declined

Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia. Your draft submission to Articles for creation has been reviewed but not accepted at this time.

Feedback

The reviewer, Cabrils, left the following feedback:

This draft's references do not show that the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion for people. The draft requires multiple published secondary sources that:

• provide significant coverage: discuss the person in detail, not brief mentions or interviews lacking independent analysis;
• are reliable: from reputable outlets with editorial oversight;
• are independent: not connected to the person, such as interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, or sponsored content.

Please add references that meet all three of these criteria. If none exist, the subject is not yet suitable for Wikipedia.

Well done on creating the draft, and it may potentially meet the relevant requirements (including WP:GNG, WP:ANYBIO) but presently it is not clear that it does.

As you may know, Wikipedia's basic requirement for entry is that the subject is notable. Essentially subjects are presumed notable if they have received significant coverage in multiple published secondary sources that are reliable, intellectually independent of each other, and independent of the subject. To properly create such a draft page, please see the articles ‘Your First Article’, ‘Referencing for Beginners’ and ‘Easier Referencing for Beginners’. In short, "notability" requires reliable sources about the subject, rather than by the subject. Thank you for declaring your conflict of interest. Given the conflict, the review of the page needs to be handled with care, mindful of the higher bar set by pages produced in circumstances of conflict of interest. Such pages typically may read too much like a promotional CV or advertorial (see WP:PROMO), which Wikipedia is not; and/or contain prose that is not of a standard appropriate for an encyclopaedia (also see WP:PEACOCK and WP:NPV). Please familiarise yourself with these pages before amending the draft. If you feel you can meet these requirements, then please make the necessary amendments before resubmitting the page. It would help our volunteer reviewers by identifying, on the draft's talk page, the WP:THREE best sources that establish notability of the subject. It would also be helpful if you could please identify with specificity, exactly which criteria you believe the page meets (eg "I think the page now meets WP:ANYBIO criteria #3, because XXXXX").

Once you have implemented these suggestions, you may also wish to leave a note for me on my talk page, including the name of the draft page, and I would be happy to reassess. As I said, I do think this draft has potential so please do persevere.

Next steps

• Edit Draft:Jeffrey Tannenbaum to address the points above, making sure to publish any changes.
• When you are ready to resubmit your draft for review, click the Resubmit button.
• If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it may be deleted.

Need help?

• For an overview of our policies and guidelines see Everything you need to know.
• You can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Scam warning

• If anyone asks you for money or payment to publish, protect, or restore a Wikipedia article or draft, it is a scam. Learn about scams on Wikipedia.

Cabrils (talk) 01:17, 17 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

Hello, Danilo Two! 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! Cabrils (talk) 01:17, 17 June 2026 (UTC)Reply

@Cabrils: Thanks for reviewing the draft and offering this feedback. I'll review in detail and see what I can do based on available sources. Danilo Two (talk) 12:48, 17 June 2026 (UTC)Reply