Hello, Llewop Eidoj, 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, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. 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:
- The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Simplified Manual of Style
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, 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! —
C.Fred (
talk)
18:36, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. — Yours,
Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ •
Talk∕
Contribs
16:20, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Llewop Eidoj ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I do not believe that this article (MegsMenopause) goes against or violates any rules. It is descriptive information about an online platform that helps women worldwide and I believe that more people should know about it, and that is why I have written this article about it. I have cited and linked to all sources, and ensured that especially any external sources have been given the correct reference. The products section is not meant to advertise (hence why I did not use any suggesting words such as :can't live without etc (as per Wikipedia rules) and I simply described the product and it's properties without suggesting anywhere it's superiority (and that would make it advertising). It is definitely not spam either as this is a legitimate platform that thousands of women use daily. And again, everything mentioned is cited accordingly. For Wikipedia to indicate that edits done are done purely for money is not only offensive to people like me who wish to provide more in depth detail to a service that I believe in, but also damages the reputation of a company, and Meg Mathews who is known for her charitable events and projects. Llewop Eidoj ( talk) 14:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Shame on you! Shame on you for actively trying to mislead us, even after you were caught. Shame on you for blatantly violating WP:COI. Shame on you for violating WP:PROMO. We require a level of honesty of our editors that you have refused to display. We can do without editors like you, editors working for PR agencies and writing about their clients, then trying to mislead us about it. Yamla ( talk) 15:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hi Yamla. Instead of rudely shaming me, could you provide me information about what I can do to not violate these rules? And also how you can assume that I am trying to mislead, when in fact I am just a first time editor, trying to understand how to do this (let's be real it's complicated) and how come I just got instantly blocked instead of denied and explained what I did wrong and how I can fix it. I'm sure that wikipedia require a level of professionalism from their admins which you have refused to display. And shaming instead of helping me understand. There are so many guidelines, that people might need help understanding them all. I only wrote about MegsMenopause because of the honest press around it. It is really unfair to address anyone with this language. Llewop Eidoj ( talk) 16:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- You are continuing to try to mislead us. If you do so one more time, I will revoke your access to this talk page. You have a clear and direct conflict of interest. "I only wrote about MegsMenopause because of the honest press around it" is blatantly false, and I will not stand for you continuing to post falsehoods like this. As to information about what you can do to not violate these rules, you've been provided with this information multiple times. When you created your account. In the section above, welcoming you to Wikipedia. In the section above, "Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion" which points to WP:COI. In my unblock decline, which points you to WP:COI and WP:PROMO. You have a path forward, but will have to take responsibility for trying to mislead us about why you were editing that article, and for violating WP:COI and WP:PROMO (and probably, WP:PAID). You will not, though, be unblocked to write about your clients. -- Yamla ( talk) 16:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
It was never my intention to post any falsehood around this, and in fact all information that was included in the article are true (all cited and referenced). I simply did not thoroughly read every single page of the rules. Now that you have provided me with the relevant pages to read through. I cannot see that I have to disclose a COI (please point me in the correct direction if I am wrong), but I must disclose if I am getting paid for this. But I am not getting paid to create this page (so please, do not assume this as this is falsehood from your end). So what do I need to disclose? This is what I could not understand. As I said, I am a genuine first time editor, and find it very upsetting that you would instantly go to : Shame on you, instead of trying to understand that I am really not understanding if I need to disclose anything. Llewop Eidoj ( talk) 17:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is not relevant whether or not you receive direct financial compensation for your edits. You have a clear conflict of interest here and must disclose it immediately. Without meaning the following at all as a passive-aggressive snipe at you, you may find WP:PLAINSIMPLECOI easier to understand than WP:COI. It's an explanatory supplement rather than the policy itself, and the policy can be a bit tricky to follow. For example, you are a paid editor even if your employer does not pay you, or does pay you but not specifically for your editing here. PLAINSIMPLECOI should be a bit easier to understand. But look, and I want to be very, very clear here. Now, in your next edit, is the time for you to be completely, totally transparent about your conflict of interest. Do so in your next edit. Not after clarifying some points, in your next edit. -- Yamla ( talk) 17:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Llewop Eidoj, 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, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. 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:
- The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Simplified Manual of Style
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, 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! —
C.Fred (
talk)
18:36, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. — Yours,
Bᴇʀʀᴇʟʏ •
Talk∕
Contribs
16:20, 26 March 2020 (UTC)
Llewop Eidoj ( block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser ( log))
Request reason:
I do not believe that this article (MegsMenopause) goes against or violates any rules. It is descriptive information about an online platform that helps women worldwide and I believe that more people should know about it, and that is why I have written this article about it. I have cited and linked to all sources, and ensured that especially any external sources have been given the correct reference. The products section is not meant to advertise (hence why I did not use any suggesting words such as :can't live without etc (as per Wikipedia rules) and I simply described the product and it's properties without suggesting anywhere it's superiority (and that would make it advertising). It is definitely not spam either as this is a legitimate platform that thousands of women use daily. And again, everything mentioned is cited accordingly. For Wikipedia to indicate that edits done are done purely for money is not only offensive to people like me who wish to provide more in depth detail to a service that I believe in, but also damages the reputation of a company, and Meg Mathews who is known for her charitable events and projects. Llewop Eidoj ( talk) 14:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
Shame on you! Shame on you for actively trying to mislead us, even after you were caught. Shame on you for blatantly violating WP:COI. Shame on you for violating WP:PROMO. We require a level of honesty of our editors that you have refused to display. We can do without editors like you, editors working for PR agencies and writing about their clients, then trying to mislead us about it. Yamla ( talk) 15:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{ unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
Hi Yamla. Instead of rudely shaming me, could you provide me information about what I can do to not violate these rules? And also how you can assume that I am trying to mislead, when in fact I am just a first time editor, trying to understand how to do this (let's be real it's complicated) and how come I just got instantly blocked instead of denied and explained what I did wrong and how I can fix it. I'm sure that wikipedia require a level of professionalism from their admins which you have refused to display. And shaming instead of helping me understand. There are so many guidelines, that people might need help understanding them all. I only wrote about MegsMenopause because of the honest press around it. It is really unfair to address anyone with this language. Llewop Eidoj ( talk) 16:42, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- You are continuing to try to mislead us. If you do so one more time, I will revoke your access to this talk page. You have a clear and direct conflict of interest. "I only wrote about MegsMenopause because of the honest press around it" is blatantly false, and I will not stand for you continuing to post falsehoods like this. As to information about what you can do to not violate these rules, you've been provided with this information multiple times. When you created your account. In the section above, welcoming you to Wikipedia. In the section above, "Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion" which points to WP:COI. In my unblock decline, which points you to WP:COI and WP:PROMO. You have a path forward, but will have to take responsibility for trying to mislead us about why you were editing that article, and for violating WP:COI and WP:PROMO (and probably, WP:PAID). You will not, though, be unblocked to write about your clients. -- Yamla ( talk) 16:48, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
It was never my intention to post any falsehood around this, and in fact all information that was included in the article are true (all cited and referenced). I simply did not thoroughly read every single page of the rules. Now that you have provided me with the relevant pages to read through. I cannot see that I have to disclose a COI (please point me in the correct direction if I am wrong), but I must disclose if I am getting paid for this. But I am not getting paid to create this page (so please, do not assume this as this is falsehood from your end). So what do I need to disclose? This is what I could not understand. As I said, I am a genuine first time editor, and find it very upsetting that you would instantly go to : Shame on you, instead of trying to understand that I am really not understanding if I need to disclose anything. Llewop Eidoj ( talk) 17:09, 30 March 2020 (UTC)
- It is not relevant whether or not you receive direct financial compensation for your edits. You have a clear conflict of interest here and must disclose it immediately. Without meaning the following at all as a passive-aggressive snipe at you, you may find WP:PLAINSIMPLECOI easier to understand than WP:COI. It's an explanatory supplement rather than the policy itself, and the policy can be a bit tricky to follow. For example, you are a paid editor even if your employer does not pay you, or does pay you but not specifically for your editing here. PLAINSIMPLECOI should be a bit easier to understand. But look, and I want to be very, very clear here. Now, in your next edit, is the time for you to be completely, totally transparent about your conflict of interest. Do so in your next edit. Not after clarifying some points, in your next edit. -- Yamla ( talk) 17:11, 30 March 2020 (UTC)