|
The article Jayne Joso has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Cordless Larry ( talk) 13:04, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Regarding your comment in this edit summary, whether Jayne Joso has "approved" the article content is not the issue. The article must conform to Wikipedia's policy of verifiability, and specifically to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Cordless Larry ( talk) 15:49, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The discussion is about the topic
Jayne Joso. Thank you.
Cordless Larry (
talk) 16:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or
) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Cordless Larry ( talk) 16:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Can I remind you about the need to sign your comments? Cordless Larry ( talk) 14:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dictionarylady. Wow there has been quite a flap around your editing.
I don't see that anybody really walked you through conflict of interest in Wikipedia and why it matters, so please allow me to do that quickly.
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. It matters.
Editors who come to Wikipedia often don't understand the policies and guidelines that govern both content and behavior here, and unfortunately often treat Wikipedia like a platform for public relations, instead of the reference work we strive to be. The policies and guidelines are the means by the community tries to realize that goal, and it is really important that everybody mind them. COI management is part of the policies and guidelines.
As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).
Disclosure is the most important, and first, step, and you pretty much did that in your edit note. The other step, as I mentioned, is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors. What we ask editors to do who have a COI and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:
- a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process (which is pretty simple!), disclose your COI on the Talk page, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and
- b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself.
By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want).
I hope that makes sense to you.
Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on the Jayne Joso article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss - really I would. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog ( talk) 13:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello again, Dictionarylady. Can I remind you of the need to disclose any conflict of interest you might have regarding Jayne Joso? Cordless Larry ( talk) 20:38, 10 July 2016 (UTC)
|
The article Jayne Joso has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.
If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{ prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Cordless Larry ( talk) 13:04, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Regarding your comment in this edit summary, whether Jayne Joso has "approved" the article content is not the issue. The article must conform to Wikipedia's policy of verifiability, and specifically to Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons. Cordless Larry ( talk) 15:49, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at
Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible
conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. The discussion is about the topic
Jayne Joso. Thank you.
Cordless Larry (
talk) 16:53, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
Hello and
welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to
talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to
sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:
- Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
- With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (
or
) located above the edit window.
This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
Thank you. Cordless Larry ( talk) 16:56, 20 June 2016 (UTC)
- Can I remind you about the need to sign your comments? Cordless Larry ( talk) 14:31, 21 June 2016 (UTC)
Hi Dictionarylady. Wow there has been quite a flap around your editing.
I don't see that anybody really walked you through conflict of interest in Wikipedia and why it matters, so please allow me to do that quickly.
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. It matters.
Editors who come to Wikipedia often don't understand the policies and guidelines that govern both content and behavior here, and unfortunately often treat Wikipedia like a platform for public relations, instead of the reference work we strive to be. The policies and guidelines are the means by the community tries to realize that goal, and it is really important that everybody mind them. COI management is part of the policies and guidelines.
As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).
Disclosure is the most important, and first, step, and you pretty much did that in your edit note. The other step, as I mentioned, is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors. What we ask editors to do who have a COI and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:
- a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process (which is pretty simple!), disclose your COI on the Talk page, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and
- b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself.
By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want).
I hope that makes sense to you.
Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on the Jayne Joso article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss - really I would. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog ( talk) 13:15, 23 June 2016 (UTC)
- Hello again, Dictionarylady. Can I remind you of the need to disclose any conflict of interest you might have regarding Jayne Joso? Cordless Larry ( talk) 20:38, 10 July 2016 (UTC)