User talk:BlueMoon87

Nomination of Andy Slater for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Andy Slater is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andy Slater until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. j⚛e decker ^talk 16:54, 13 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

July 2022

Hello, I'm I dream of horses. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Andy Slater—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 00:59, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello BlueMoon87. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Andy Slater, 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:BlueMoon87. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=BlueMoon87|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. Magnolia677 (talk) 08:35, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Magnolia677. Thank you for the explanation and its completely understood, however I am by zero means receiving anything from Andy Slater for updating his page. There is not one penny or gift or anything directly or even indirectly being exchanged for updating the page. BlueMoon87 (talk) 14:48, 18 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your thread has been archived

Hi BlueMoon87! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Neutrality and Cleanup, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days.

You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please create a new thread.

See also the help page about the archival process. The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on top of the current page (your user talk page). Muninnbot (talk) 19:03, 21 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]