User talk:AGC-webmaster

==Army Geospatial Center Wikipedia article AGC - Welcome to Wikipedia. Concerning your recent edits on the subject article, I thought I would discuss the issue here on your talk page rather than getting into a possible edit war. I mean no offense, and I hope none is taken.

The wiki-link is to the USACE article, not to the USACE website. Wikipedia is not controlled by USACE nor is it compelled to comply with outside desires. One reason that I put in the Wikilink is that the USACE article had a link to the Army Geospatial Center. I was therefore providing a companion link back to the USACE article.

As indicated in the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking :

"Linking through hyperlinks is an important feature of Wikipedia. Internal links bind the project together into an interconnected whole. ... Appropriate links provide instant pathways to locations within and outside the project that are likely to increase readers' understanding of the topic at hand.

Since the US Army Corps of Engineers is referenced within the AGC article and people may not necessarily know about USACE, it is important to provide a link so that users of Wikipedia can easily reference the USACE article.

I have therefore undid your well-intentioned edit. However, to assuage your concerns, I have also added a reference to USACE website on the Army Geospatial Center with both the USACE and AGC logos.

Please be aware of the 3 Revert Rule if you are thinking about again removing this link.

Have a great day! Don'tKnowItAtAll (talk) 18:21, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

April 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Army Geospatial Center. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 18:01, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then explain what you mean by additional citations for verification? According to the citation page "Citations, frequently called references, are an important part of any Wikipedia article, serving to identify the reliable sources on which the information in the article is based. In most cases, citations for specific pieces of information contained in an article are given in the form of footnotes, though they can also appear within the body of an article." That is being done. The citations I have been placing in the article are coming from reliable sources. I do not see the need for a third-party individual to verify information that is coming from the main source, which includes third party articles that are written on the programs that AGC develops/uses by third-party sources.

AGC-webmaster (talk) 18:11, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello AGC-webmaster. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Army Geospatial Center, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Ks0stm ^{(T•C•G•E)} 18:57, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Army Geospatial Center

Hi there. I reviewed your request for semi-protection of Army Geospatial Center and declined the request (I've left a rationale there). I noticed the conflict and thought I'd give a little advice. Firstly, it is important that you discuss the contentious issues with the users involved on the talk page - even if you think you're right, it's important that we discuss issues with each other so that we can reach agreement. Secondly, I recommend that you read our guidelines on conflicts of interest. While you're not prevented from editing a page which you have a conflict of interest in, you must ensure that you do so neutrally and within Wikipedia policy. Removing the primary source tag is inappropriate because many of the sources in the article are connected to the topic. I'm sure you'll be able to take this advice on board and work collaboratively to improve the article; you're welcome to edit the page, but remember that edit warring and disruptive editing could lead to a block. I hope that all helps. ItsZippy ^{(talk • contributions)} 19:54, 26 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]