|
Hello, Gnurob. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:
{{
request edit}}
template);In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you. -- Ronz ( talk) 01:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.
Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.
Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.
If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.
Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.
I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
|
Could you please address the conflict of interest concerns so we can get that out of the way. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Please use the article talk page for discussion, rather than including commentary in the article itself [6]. Adding the link seems to make it clear that you're more interested in having the link in the article than improving the article.
Further, your comment [7] makes it sound as if you are the author of articles at robertmiller.ca. I hope it was a mistake on your part. Please explain at Talk:Building_code#Discussion_on_Reverting_Edit_Citation. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I have encountered an editor that appears to be using aggressive tactics. At times it felt more like subtle threats, not a collaborative discourse towards a consensus. Most of the tactics appeared to be the same as those used [ on BLP noticeboard] dating back to 2010. Generally, guidelines were interpreted with a heavy bias, and cases where exceptions are acceptable to Wikipedia were ignored. I feel a genuine attempt to contribute to this community was ruthlessly squashed by this bad behaviour that--with extensive experience--plays very close to the line while avoiding punitive actions. What can I do?
|
Hello, Gnurob. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:
{{
request edit}}
template);In addition, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you. -- Ronz ( talk) 01:36, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.
Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.
Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.
If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.
Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.
I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. -- Ronz ( talk) 16:04, 5 January 2016 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
|
Could you please address the conflict of interest concerns so we can get that out of the way. -- Ronz ( talk) 15:42, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Please use the article talk page for discussion, rather than including commentary in the article itself [6]. Adding the link seems to make it clear that you're more interested in having the link in the article than improving the article.
Further, your comment [7] makes it sound as if you are the author of articles at robertmiller.ca. I hope it was a mistake on your part. Please explain at Talk:Building_code#Discussion_on_Reverting_Edit_Citation. -- Ronz ( talk) 19:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can , contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse. |
I have encountered an editor that appears to be using aggressive tactics. At times it felt more like subtle threats, not a collaborative discourse towards a consensus. Most of the tactics appeared to be the same as those used [ on BLP noticeboard] dating back to 2010. Generally, guidelines were interpreted with a heavy bias, and cases where exceptions are acceptable to Wikipedia were ignored. I feel a genuine attempt to contribute to this community was ruthlessly squashed by this bad behaviour that--with extensive experience--plays very close to the line while avoiding punitive actions. What can I do?