Hello Wilberterra. 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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 very 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 extremely 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:Wilberterra. The template {{
Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Wilberterra|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.
MrOllie (
talk)
11:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
@ MrOllie:
The current page has outdated and incorrect info which needs to be corrected. Public company profiles should be accurate and up to date. Per close association editorial best practices Wikipedia:Best_practices_for_editors_with_close_associations, making uncontroversial edits directly aren't prohibited as long as they are uncontroversial updates or corrections. But, disclosure guidelines must (and should be!) followed. So, I will:
1) Disclose my COI by making a statement on the talk page
2) Ensure edits are in accord with close association guidelines, and all guidelines pertaining to verifiability, citations and POV neutrality (it is not a new page, just an update, but all info will meet the best practice guideline for new organization pages :"articles should be written in natural, but neutral, language and merely summarize factual information from third-party articles, studies, reports and books that are already in print." Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations)
3) Request a peer review on COIN, which is a valid alternative to requesting someone else make the changes on the talk page ("you may propose changes on talk pages (by using the request edit template), or by posting a note at the COI noticeboard, so that they can be peer reviewed" Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest), and in this case, is more practical given that the number of updates and corrections required
I will wait until later today to make the 2nd and 3rd changes above so that you have an opportunity to see my reply. I want to request the peer review as soon as the updates are posted, but I'll want to be sure the page is not reverted before I can get peer review feedback (and I invite you to join in the peer review if you have availability and interest).
Thanks! -- Wilberterra ( talk) 08:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
As for the addition of ixEngine on the list of DPI engines on the DPT page that I discovered when I was updating the Enea site, I do plan to simply suggest that as a change on the Talk page, disclosing the COI status with Enea. The same applies for any future edits to any Enea-related content, though again, this was a one-time request for help unrelated to my work, and I don't anticipate making any future updates. Thanks -- Wilberterra ( talk) 12:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Guy (
help! -
typo?)
20:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)In case the penny hasn't dropped yet, we don't treat some random little form with 300 employees the same as we treat Apple, IBM or even IKEA, for the very simple and obvious reason that there is no parity whatsoever. Guy ( help! - typo?) 20:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
o
Hello Wilberterra. 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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 very 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 extremely 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:Wilberterra. The template {{
Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Wilberterra|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.
MrOllie (
talk)
11:53, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
@ MrOllie:
The current page has outdated and incorrect info which needs to be corrected. Public company profiles should be accurate and up to date. Per close association editorial best practices Wikipedia:Best_practices_for_editors_with_close_associations, making uncontroversial edits directly aren't prohibited as long as they are uncontroversial updates or corrections. But, disclosure guidelines must (and should be!) followed. So, I will:
1) Disclose my COI by making a statement on the talk page
2) Ensure edits are in accord with close association guidelines, and all guidelines pertaining to verifiability, citations and POV neutrality (it is not a new page, just an update, but all info will meet the best practice guideline for new organization pages :"articles should be written in natural, but neutral, language and merely summarize factual information from third-party articles, studies, reports and books that are already in print." Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations)
3) Request a peer review on COIN, which is a valid alternative to requesting someone else make the changes on the talk page ("you may propose changes on talk pages (by using the request edit template), or by posting a note at the COI noticeboard, so that they can be peer reviewed" Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest), and in this case, is more practical given that the number of updates and corrections required
I will wait until later today to make the 2nd and 3rd changes above so that you have an opportunity to see my reply. I want to request the peer review as soon as the updates are posted, but I'll want to be sure the page is not reverted before I can get peer review feedback (and I invite you to join in the peer review if you have availability and interest).
Thanks! -- Wilberterra ( talk) 08:24, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
As for the addition of ixEngine on the list of DPI engines on the DPT page that I discovered when I was updating the Enea site, I do plan to simply suggest that as a change on the Talk page, disclosing the COI status with Enea. The same applies for any future edits to any Enea-related content, though again, this was a one-time request for help unrelated to my work, and I don't anticipate making any future updates. Thanks -- Wilberterra ( talk) 12:34, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
{{
unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
.
Guy (
help! -
typo?)
20:07, 8 September 2020 (UTC)In case the penny hasn't dropped yet, we don't treat some random little form with 300 employees the same as we treat Apple, IBM or even IKEA, for the very simple and obvious reason that there is no parity whatsoever. Guy ( help! - typo?) 20:09, 8 September 2020 (UTC)
o