User talk:Ejsmanalo

Welcome!

Hello, Ejsmanalo, and welcome to Wikipedia!

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 17:00, 13 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ejsmanalo, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Ejsmanalo! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

20:03, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Ejsmanalo, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Daniel S. Peña Sr. 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) 01:27, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dan Pena's Page

Hello! I left a message for you on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Daniel_S._Pe%C3%B1a_Sr. -- I appreciate the desire to get information out, but it needs to be written in a neutral way. We'll be happy to help you if you want to post that information and sources on the Talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Axcviii (talk • contribs) 02:24, 22 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Ejsmanalo. I spend time working on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing, which is mostly about health and medicine. You disclosed here that Am currently working for him as a marketing guy

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. Unmanaged conflicts of interest can also lead to people behaving in ways that violate our behavioral policies and cause disruption in the normal editing process. Managing conflict of interest well, also protects conflicted editors themselves - please see WP:Wikipedia is in the real world, and Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for some guidance and stories about people who have brought bad press upon themselves through unmanaged conflict of interest editing.

As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step, and that needs to be formalized a bit.

Would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:Ejsmanal - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple, like what you wrote at the talk page: "I work in marketing for [[]] and have a conflict of interest with respect to that page and related ones." I have added the disclosure at the article talk page, so it is done there.

Would you please add the disclosure to your userpage? Once you do that, I will walk you through the peer review part, and then give you some general guidelines about working here.

Also, would you please disclose here, if you have edited under any other accounts here? You can reply just below here. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 07:20, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, a work as a marketing consultant for Mr. Daniel S. Pena. Am only doing written content under this username ejsmanalo. Hoping the community can assist me on how to update his page and also follow the wiki guidelines.Ejsmanalo (talk) 08:28, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying! Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit. That is how we know who said what to whom and when.

Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).

know this is unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog (talk) 08:32, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Would you please add that to your userpage, as I mentioned above? About the other accounts question, you only answered about now. I asked about past accounts. Would you please answer? thx Jytdog (talk) 08:33, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Jytdog, when you say add to you may userpage do you mean edit my user page and add my COI also the page am currently editing? Also to answer your question in the past i have only used this account. or another would be just IP address as their were cases before that i forgot to sign in when am making edits. as per the previously listed username unfortunately am not the one who have used those account. I can verify with his team regarding those account if needed.Ejsmanalo (talk) 08:41, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I put two colons in front of my comment above, so you should have put three. I fixed that so there are three. This comment has 4 colons, so when you reply, put five colons. This is not difficult.

Above I wrote the following (I forgot to fill in the blank there, and have done so here): Would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:Ejsmanal - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple, like what you wrote at the talk page: "I work in marketing for Daniel S. Peña Sr. and have a conflict of interest with respect to that page and related ones."

Would you please do that? Thanks for answering about past accounts. Jytdog (talk) 08:55, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, this is good enough. Now let me walk you through the "peer review" thing. I will open a new section for that... Jytdog (talk) 08:57, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

OK, next steps

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask of editors who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to

(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and

(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section on the talk page, put the proposed content there formatted just as you would if you were adding it directly to the article, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) place the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review. In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once. Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example. This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (There are good faith paid editors here, who have signed and follow the Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, and there are "black hat" paid editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where a company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work on the Peña article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 08:59, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This is acknowledge and i agre to adhere to WP guidelines. Thank you Ejsmanalo (talk) 09:06, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Jytdog (talk) 09:54, 16 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Courtesy notice - ANI

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you.

I've started a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators'_noticeboard/Incidents#Legal_threat_for_deletion_of_Dan_Peña. Please consider joining the discussion. --Hipal/Ronz (talk) 16:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please review WP's guidelines about legal threats and off-wiki legal action

Please tread carefully with your edits related to Dan Peña. Please review WP:No legal threats. Basically, an editor can either work to improve the article within the parameters of Wikipedia (editing, talk page discussion, etc.) or outside of Wikipedia (legal action). If a user indicates that they are pursuing legal action or other off-wiki actions, then they may not edit Wikipedia. In most cases, their account is also blocked until the legal threat is retracted.

Consider your next action carefully. If you withdraw the comment about legal action and work for on-Wiki discussions, you will be allowed to participate further. If you do not retract the comment about legal action, or if you make any further such comments, then your account will be immediately blocked. —C.Fred (talk) 16:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion request (take down request) Dan Peña

Sorry it has come to this. As already mentioned, your best bet is to contact the WMF directly at info-en-qwikimedia.org Another email is legalwikimedia.org. That's the one I'd use. This Is the WMF's contact page. Hope this helps. --Deep fried okra User talk:Deepfriedokra 17:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May 2020

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. qedk (t 愛 c) 14:39, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]