User talk:Cancare1

February 2024

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your user page may not meet Wikipedia's user page guidelines. It is intended for basic information about yourself, your interests and goals as they relate to editing Wikipedia, as well as disclosures of conflicts of interest and paid editing. Although a lot of freedom is allowed in personalizing your user page, it is not:

an encyclopedia article (and should not be styled to look like one)
a workspace for a draft article
a personal website, blog, or social media site
a space for self-promotion or other advertising
a CV, resumé or lengthy autobiography

The user page guidelines have additional information on what is and what is not considered acceptable content. Please use your user sandbox or the draft article space to practice editing or to create new articles. Thank you. Acroterion (talk) 00:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This sucks as I spent a while writing that page. It was supposed to be a wiki page and I followed what I thought was the process. Now it is lost and I don't have what I wrote to put it elsewhere. THANKS! I am not finding wiki very user friendly at all if honest. Time to bale. Cancare1 (talk) 10:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was promotional in nature and tone. I will be happy to put it into draft space, where you could work on it. However, it would need a complete rewrite, and you would have to plainly declare any conflict of interest. The template is not enough. Acroterion (talk) 12:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK thanks that would help. And I will try. I find it frustrating that when I see content around other journals and the one we work on is missing that it is difficult to add such content if you are involved. I am not worried about making a COI statement as this is about a medical journal that is publicly available. My alternate is to find a colleague not involved with the Journal to create the post??? Cancare1 (talk) 12:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While editing with a WP:COI isn't outright prohibited, it is strongly discouraged. You will first need to explicitly state your connection to the publication, and read the COI policy I've linked. Second,you will need to review the notability guidelines. All subjects must themselves have been discussed in independent publications in media at enough length that they can be written about without self-sourcing. Self-sourcing should only be used to substantiate basic facts (publisher, circulation, etc.). And third, please write plain factual prose, devoid of promotion or puffery. It should not read like the company website (and should contain no content copied from there. Also, I doubt the coer is your "own work." It would have to be used with permission from the publisher, explicitly conveyed from the organization in a verifiable manner. See [[WP:RS|the reliable sourcing and verifiability policies. The draft is at Draft:International Wound Journal. Acroterion (talk) 13:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have completely rewritten it. Still working on layout a bit. Let me know if this is better and more acceptable? I saved the draft which hopefully you can see. Cancare1 (talk) 16:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, first, you still need to clearly describe your connection to the journal or its publisher. You don't need to give your name (in fact, I don't recommend that), but you do need to account for your connection so other editors can understand the nature of your declared COI. Acroterion (talk) 17:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to do that. Before finalizing it.

Statement I was going to make was "This post was created by the editor of the International Wound Journal. I have been the editor since the beginning in 2004'. The intent of this post is to ensure clinicians using wikipedia to find clinical journals are aware of the IWJ among the many other medical journals available."

Does this work? Cancare1 (talk) 20:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am so confused as your follow on comments post the first quibble paragraph seem to refer to the first draft. I completely re wrote it and what you are referring to no longer exists. Cancare1 (talk) 12:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies I went back into it to see what was going on and for some reason the some of the old content was there. I removed it. It was never supposed to be there. Don't know what I did wrong as I though it was removed when I reviewed the page before saving it. Cancare1 (talk) 12:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, the editing interface isn't exactly friendly. Acroterion (talk) 12:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi I think my page is good now? How do I get it published? Cancare1 (talk) 13:28, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I could quibble that it is essentially promotion of the journal. However, again, a carefully-written encyclopedia article draft is not prohibited, and you need not say all that in each edit summary. You just need to state it clearly on your userpage here, and maybe on the draft's talkpage. People post on Facebook. People write encyclopedia articles here, so you need to adjust your editing goggles with that in mind. Just-the-facts-ma'am may not lead to sparkling prose, but it's what's expected in articles that can be put into article space.

As for the article, the formatting needs extensive work. The three paragraphs at the end supported by the last five references, all self-references, could be dispensed with, or at least condensed down to a single paragraph covering circulation. Encyclopedia articles never contain anything remotely like "journal has gone from strength to strength." "The same goes for "forward-thinking" and "stakeholder." All three paragraphs belong on your website, not on WP. That kind of thing is a big reason why WP is very fussy about people writing articles about themselves or their businesses. Editorial distance helps to avoid that kind of thing. Your name should not appear anywhere unless it's supported by an independent reference. Acroterion (talk)

As for your "colleague not affiliated with the journal," they would have to be at arms length - not affiliated with Wiley, for instance. Also, they will have to stick with the manual of style for Wikipedia. It's a bit more than putting something on social media - there are extensive editorial standards to follow, and in your case, once an article is published, you would be expected to avoid any direct editing, making suggestions instead on te article's associated talkpage. Acroterion (talk) 13:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Cancare1. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} 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 Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
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. Acroterion (talk) 13:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]