Hello, Antonisbouritsas! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already excited about Wikipedia, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field when making edits to pages. Happy editing! Randykitty (talk) 19:52, 2 June 2015 (UTC)[reply] Getting Started Contributing to Wikipedia The five pillars of Wikipedia • Tutorial • Your first article How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions New contributors' help page Where to: ask questions • make requests Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump IRC channels • Mailing lists Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community (The Signpost) Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Maintenance • Peer review • Requested articles Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Hello, Antonisbouritsas. 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. 2601:188:180:B8E0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 18:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article until the discussion has finished.

Brian Kendig (talk) 02:30, 25 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Brian Kendig Thank you for the clarification. I understand the need for rigorous adherence to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. However, I believe that the World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) is a notable organization with significant global influence in the field of occupational therapy. It has contributed extensively to the development of the profession worldwide and plays a key role in international collaborations. Given its recognized position and impact, I think the article should be included in Wikipedia to provide valuable information for those seeking to understand the role of occupational therapy on a global scale.

I am happy to work on improving the article further to address any concerns and ensure it aligns with Wikipedia's standards for quality and neutrality. antonisbouritsas (talk) 09:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Antonisbouritsas. Thank you for your work on Occupational therapy in Greece. Another editor, Klbrain, has reviewed it as part of new pages patrol and left the following comment:

Thanks for creating this page for a profession in Greece. It seems to be an unacknowledged translation of the Greek article; remember to acknowledge the translation with the first edit summary that creates the page (see Help:Translation). Remember to use capital only for proper nouns, and each Wikilink should only be given once per page (roughly). Categories are also helpful for ensuring that readers can find this content.

To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|Klbrain}}. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)

Klbrain (talk) 20:16, 27 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G4 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be a repost of material that was previously deleted following a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/World Federation of Occupational Therapists (WFOT). When a page has substantially identical content to that of a page deleted after a discussion, and any changes in the content do not address the reasons for which the material was previously deleted, it may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. CycloneYoris ^talk! 08:41, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@CycloneYoris I don't understand the reason why this article shouldn't be on Wikipedia! Isn't it its role to provide free information worldwide? Why shouldn't the World Federation of Occupational Therapy information have a place on it? As to what such fury for the deletion of this particular article? antonisbouritsas (talk) 08:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, that is not the role of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. It is not a place to just tell about something. Wikipedia articles are written with a neutral point of view and summarize what independent reliable sources say about topics that meet our criteria for notability, such as a notable organization. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I understand the demands for neutrality and the need for reliable sources. However, I believe that the World Federation of Occupational Therapy (WFOT) meets the criteria to be listed on Wikipedia, given its global impact on the field of occupational therapy and its international visibility. It is an institutional organisation active in many countries and has been instrumental in the dissemination and development of Occupational Therapy. Its registration can provide valuable information about the profession and help to better understand the role of occupational therapy worldwide. antonisbouritsas (talk) 09:08, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is not a place to "list" something, and existence is insufficient for inclusion. If you have independent reliable sources that discuss the influence of this organization, you haven't yet given them- any article about this organization must primarily summarize independent sources, not its own website. 331dot (talk) 09:17, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

And note that such sources should not be press releases, interviews, or the mere reporting of activities. They must include in depth coverage by the source about the organization. 331dot (talk) 09:19, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Antonisbouritsas. 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:Antonisbouritsas. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Antonisbouritsas|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. 331dot (talk) 08:44, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot Hello 331dot,

The allegation of undisclosed paid advocacy is unfounded. I am an occupational therapist, and my edits relate to my professional field purely out of academic and professional interest, without any form of compensation or external directive.

Editing and refining articles related to my area of expertise does not constitute paid advocacy. I have not received, nor do I expect to receive, any form of payment, compensation, or benefit for my contributions.

If you need any further clarification, feel free to ask. antonisbouritsas (talk) 09:04, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is the nature of your relationship with the organization? 331dot (talk) 09:15, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I have no affiliation with the organization, I am not a member, and I have no obligations related to it. My contribution is purely encyclopedic! antonisbouritsas (talk) 11:25, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks 331dot (talk) 11:30, 31 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]