User talk:ConstantEditor126

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello ConstantEditor126, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Yokohama Port Museum have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

• You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
• Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
• Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
• Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 22:40, 7 September 2017 (UTC)

Ways to improve Shammai Engelmayer

Hi, I'm Rosguill. ConstantEditor126, thanks for creating Shammai Engelmayer!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. Some of the article's citations are puzzling, and often appear to cite articles that do not support the claims within this article. Additionally, some of the content runs afoul of WP:NPOV, as it cites Engelmayer's comments in an interview, despite interviews not meeting Wikipedia's criteria of a reliable source.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Rosguill^talk 23:30, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

August 2019

Hello ConstantEditor126. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Philip R. Shawe, 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:ConstantEditor126. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=ConstantEditor126|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. Dom from Paris (talk) 19:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Dom from Paris - How does one prove that there is no interest other than news interest? I had been following this case and this company since my friend, a lawyer who represents a public company that has a matter before the Chancery Court in Delaware, had told me about it. Since, I have read and watched it with amazement. I met Mr. Shawe once in Reno while I was there by chance. I will not edit further unless deemed alright to do so.

There is also not so much promotion here, just facts statedSethT (talk) 19:34, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Your article creation is very promotional, you have avoided reporting anything negative from the sources such as him being fined more than 7m dollars for lying under oath and attempting to destroy information on his laptop. The spin on the article is very anti Eltling and pro Shawe. You have been making edits to this subject for over a year now, your first edits back in 2017 show skills that are incompatible with a new user. You created an article for the lawyer that represented him. You recreated an article for a company that had been deleted as being overly promotional with an edit comment asserting its notability. All of this are hallmarks of an undeclared paid editor. What I think would be a good idea would be to have this article go through WP:AFC so that experienced editors can help you clean up the promotional aspects of the article. --Dom from Paris (talk) 21:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Dom from Paris I will not touch it. I never said I wasn't familiar with Wikipedia. I create articles on people and topics that i get interested in. Like I said, I have been following this case for a while. Again, I agree to not touch it further. Thank you SethT (talk) 21:27, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Are you OK with me moving it to draft space so it can be put through AFC? Dom from Paris (talk) 21:31, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

Dom from Paris Feel free. I am not opposed to it, and think he is notable - and consider that my encouragement for this was that the co founder has a page too and is at least as notable as this subject is. Thank youSethT (talk) 22:02, 12 August 2019 (UTC)

CS1 error on Martin P. Russo

Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Martin P. Russo, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:

• A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:26, 2 January 2024 (UTC)