User talk:DrPeterT

October 2017

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Nikos Kazantzakis. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Dr. K. 17:36, 4 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I did not see the information I posted as promotional material, but rather as important information that readers of Kazantzakis would want to have. I have removed the statement that you saw as promotion from the entry. I still think that this important information about translation should be somewhere on the Kazantzakis page, as well as on the page for Zorba itself. DrPeterT````

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Nikos Kazantzakis. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Dr. K. 00:33, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, DrPeterT. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Nikos Kazantzakis, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate 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).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Dr. K. 00:34, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. I'm confused here. I know I'm new at this, but I still find what is happening puzzling. First, I have no conflict of interest related to the new translation of Zorba the Greek. I was glad to find out it existed, and after seeing it and looking at it side-by-side with the Greek text, I thought it would be an important addition to the Kazantzakis page. I am being accused of edit warring. I put up something factual, and someone else took it down. Why is this not edit warring? I even took out the notation that could have been seen as promotion, and put up a simple, true, bibliographical entry. This too was taken down. Therefore, the Kazantzakis page remains incomplete, lacking this small, but important entry about an available translation of Zorba the Greek. I have long had a very positive opinion of Wikipedia. This has been shaken somewhat. I try to add a small, but important, true bit of information to the Kazantzakis page, and my entry keeps being removed, even though it is a factual piece that helps make the bibliography more complete. DrPeterTDrPeterT (talk) 17:21, 18 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]