User talk:Eddiemercado

March 2014

Please note that the article title reflects DirectTV format, which is the format that should be used per Wikipedia's manual of style. As such, that's the format that should be used throughout the article, regardless of the marketing styling used by the subject of the article. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:44, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Eddiemercado. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article DirecTV, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:45, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Bartek. However, my changes are only to comply with how the company displays its name in all official capacities. This is not a marketing change, it is how the company displays its official name. http://investor.directv.com/overview/corporate-profile/default.aspx

We have a copy of their logo prominently displayed in the upper right of the article to reflect how they represent the name. Within Wikipedia, we follow WP:MOS regardless of the preferences of a company. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:52, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I would like an edit to acknowledge that the company now refers to itself as DIRECTV in all official references. If Wikipedia rules do not allow us to change our name, I think it is fare for the article to reference that we made a change to our trademark.

That could be worked into the first paragraph in the lead fairly easilly, I would think. So that discussion of doing this can be more visible to more editors, can you make the suggestion on the article talk page Talk:DirecTV? As you claim a direct connection to the company, maximum transparency for the edit would be best, and a short discussion on the talk page of the article would allow for that. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 19:23, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

FYI: there is precedent for clarifying the styling of the company name in the lead section, so there shouldn't be any problem. Examples are Pixar, Impact Wrestling, Subway (restaurant), and many others where in parenthesis after the company name in the lead is the phrase "stylizes as xxxxx" to show that the company uses specific capitalization in its self-identification. The same can easily be done in the DirecTV article. I just request that your comment asking for this clarification be added to the article talk page at talk:DirecTV, to clarify for others later should anyone in the future question the reason for having it mentioned in this article. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 20:21, 10 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]