User talk:184.63.112.99

May 2021

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I noticed that you recently added commentary to an article, Loren P. Woods. While Wikipedia welcomes editors' opinions on an article and how it could be changed, these comments are more appropriate for the article's accompanying talk page. If you post your comments there, other editors working on the same article will notice and respond to them, and your comments will not disrupt the flow of the article. However, keep in mind that even on the talk page of an article, you should limit your discussion to improving the article. Article talk pages are not the place to discuss opinions of the subject of articles, nor are such pages a forum. • | melecie | t 04:00, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Please do not add or significantly change content without citing verifiable and reliable sources, as you did with this edit to Loren P. Woods. Before making any potentially controversial edits, it is recommended that you discuss them first on the article's talk page. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 04:08, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, 184.63.112.99. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Loren P. Woods, 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. Randompointofview (talk) 04:28, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Why edits from this IP Address on Loren P. Woods were reverted and may still be reverted

Hello, and Welcome to Wikipedia. While it is frustrating to have edits reverted, these reversions are caused by several violations of important English Wikipedia policies and guidelines, including at least 2 core content policies. Although these may not be as famous as the vandalism policies, these are still essential and enforceable.

The main issue is that the conflict of interest guidelines has been continually violated. Unfortunately, while being a family member is usually a sign of credibility, this is not the case on Wikipedia. With very limited exceptions (a full list can be found at Wikipedia:COISELF), editors are not allowed to directly make edits regarding people they are personally connected with. Instead, they should request edits through the appropriate templates (instructions can be found on the COI warning I already placed on this talk page).

Speaking of which, a related issue is that citing your own knowledge is prohibited by the No original research policy. Specifically, it is stated that editors should not "add unsourced material from your personal experience, because that would make Wikipedia a primary source of that material." (Shortcut link: WP:PRIMARY) While it is possible for secondary cited sources to be inaccurate, citing yourself violates the verifiability policy principle that "[a]ll material in Wikipedia mainspace, including everything in articles, lists and captions, must be verifiable." Although other sources were mentioned in edit summaries, the main problem with these is that they are not publicly available and cited in inline citations.

Finally, you may have noticed I attempted to rewrite the last intro sentence. This is because the sentence was basically a word-for-word copy of the cited source, which violates the plagarism policy. If this policy didn't exist, Wikipedia editors would likely be subject to needless copyright disputes.

After reading this explanation, I hope you understand why these reverts have happened and what you can do about that. However, continuing to ignore posted notices and reverting the reverts without any dialogue with other editors will not lead to a satisfactory resolution. Most editors watching recent changes are not out to cause trouble, but are simply upholding Wikipedia's principles while making improvements anywhere they can. Sincerely, Randompointofview (talk) 06:55, 16 May 2021 (UTC).

Secondary note: Still have more questions? The Wikipedia:Teahouse may be useful. Randompointofview (talk) 07:01, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

New message from HMSLavender

Hello, 184.63.112.99. You have new messages at HMSLavender's talk page.
Message added 14:21, 18 May 2021 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

lavender|^{(formerly HMSSolent)}|lambast 14:21, 18 May 2021 (UTC)

---