User talk:Csmithepe

Link canvassing

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:42, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

IMPORTANT NOTICE

Hello, Csmithepe. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Connecticut, 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, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
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 must 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 WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Your disclosure is appreciated, however I had to revert your changes because of our COI and Paid editing policy. I will direct you to Wikipedia:Edit requests in order to make further changes. Thank you for being willing to contribute to this project. ―Matthew J. Long -Talk-^☖ 16:22, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please note:you are required to make full disclosure of your conflict both on your userpage, but on every page you edit for compensation. Please use the appropriate templates for both. John from Idegon (talk) 20:31, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@John from Idegon: Hi John, since I heard from MattLongCT, I've been adding my proposed edits to Talk pages instead of directly editing. In those proposed edits, I've said that I work for Education Week. I'm not sure which template I should use to disclose that on the Talk page - can you point me to the right one? Thanks so much for your help and for your patience. Csmithepe (talk) 20:44, 11 February 2019 (UTC)Csmithepe[reply]

Nope. You get paid. I don't. Figure it out. John from Idegon (talk) 20:47, 11 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:DISCLOSEPAY and {{Connected contributor (paid)}}. Mathglot (talk) 07:42, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your additions of EdWeek's state education system rankings/gradings - please include a synopsis of their criteria used for the grades/ranks and secondary source(s)

Hi, Csmithepe! I saw your recent edits and requests for edits. Thank you for contributing to Wikipedia!

I would like to suggest that you include a synopsis of the criteria that EdWeek uses to generate these rankings, since otherwise it just appears as some organization's opinions, in ALL articles you would like these EdWeek state grades added to, or at least include a link stating that the criteria used for ranking can be found here.....maybe the reference for the Chance-for-Success word should point to that.

The criteria for their first two rankings (Chance-for-Success and School Finance) appear to be found here: https://www.edweek.org/ew/articles/2018/01/17/how-we-graded-the-states.html

I also agree with Spintendo, you should find someone else who is citing your reports; see Wikipedia's guidelines on primary and secondary sources.

Thanks for your contributions, and for openly stating your Conflict of Interest. ---Avatar317 (talk) 06:37, 12 February 2019 (UTC)Avatar317[reply]