User talk:Gena dandan

If you're the band's manager, you have a conflict of interest

Hello, Gena dandan. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Mystirum, 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. Thank you. —C.Fred (talk) 17:48, 22 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Gena dandan. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. 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.
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, 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:Gena dandan. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Gena dandan|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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message.

Please see my reply to you on my talk page. You need to clarify your paid relationship with the band. If you're the manager of the band or working at their direction, then you have a conflict of interest. If you are being paid specifically to place information about the band on Wikipedia, then you are a paid editor with a conflict of interest. —C.Fred (talk) 18:48, 23 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have affirmed you are the owner of the band, that now makes it crystal clear that you have a conflict of interest. You should not create an article about your band. If the band were to become notable, then an independent editor could write an article based on what has been written about the band in independent reliable sources like magazine articles. —C.Fred (talk) 20:17, 7 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]