User talk:Geojacob

October 2006

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites that you are affiliated with, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Demiurge 13:55, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Self Help Africa

I have nominated Self Help Africa, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Self Help Africa. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time. Bongo matic 01:43, 20 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

License tagging for File:Maceo.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Maceo.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

File copyright problem with File:Maceo.jpg

File Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading File:Maceo.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. — neuro^(talk) 13:09, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Hello Geojacob. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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, broadly construed, 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:Geojacob. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Geojacob|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. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Blablubbs|talk 19:16, 28 March 2021 (UTC) Thank you Blablubbs for this note. I have created a listing here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Geojacob Hope this is correct? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Geojacob (talk • contribs) [reply]

Promotion

Hello. Per Blablubbs's note above, while COI editors are encouraged to disclose associations (and PAID editors are required to disclose associations), that is not the end of the story. Declaring an association isn't the only obligation on COI editors. Or any other editor for that matter. It is expected that *all* editors:

avoid editing/creating articles about yourself, colleagues, employer, organisation or competitors;
instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles
avoid linking to your organisation's website in other articles
abide by the project's notability and content policies (including those relating to TONE, NPOV and SPAM)

Otherwise, if an editor finds that near 100% of their edits involve promotion of a particular subject, then they would likely want to question whether their motivations for doing so align with those of this project/community. In short: Just because the orgs with which you have an association are non-profit, doesn't mean SOAPBOXing or PROMOTION is any less problematic than it would be if added to (say) the articles on Coca Cola or Shell or Amazon by someone with an association with those subjects. Guliolopez (talk) 08:49, 17 June 2021 (UTC)[reply]