User talk:Ghavindeonarain

Hello, Ghavindeonarain. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Robert Montgomery (physician), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• do your best to comply with 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).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 04:34, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Recent edits

Hello,

I have no personal affiliation with Dr. Robert Montgomery. I was hired by him to update his Wikipedia page with more updated activity about his career. I can provide written documentation verifying the edits that I have made to the Robert Montgomery (physician) page. I believe the edits I made should be restored. Ghavindeonarain (talk) 20:48, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

No. They are not written in an appropriate tone for an encyclopedia; more specifically, they are written in a non-neutral, laudatory tone and they are not derived from reliable, independent third-party sources. If you were hired by Dr. Montgomery you should only be proposing changes on the article's talk page and you must comply with WP:PAID (an edit summary in the article is not good enough, as you have re-introduced content that was deleted because it is written like a press release or a self-authored promotional biography). - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:51, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Paid editing

Hello Ghavindeonarain. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Robert Montgomery (physician), and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

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, 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:Ghavindeonarain. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ghavindeonarain|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Melcous (talk) 23:01, 19 November 2018 (UTC)

Thank You and Moving Forward

Thank you for your response User:Melcous

Moving Forward I would be happy to disclose my affiliation with Dr. Montgomery. According to the Wiki:Paid article, I saw that the disclosure could be made in the edit summary. If this is not a practice, I am happy to propose edits on the article's talk page, but I am a bit confused as to how to do so, or how long this process would take. Regardless, I wish to fully comply with Wikipedia's terms and will refrain from any further edits until I receive a response.

Despite saying you would refrain from further edits until you received a response, you have again made wholesale changes to the article just two days later. Please stop. You should use the Template:Request edit on the article's talk page and you should make sure any changes you suggest are worded neutrally and verified by providing reliable, independent, secondary sources. It is also much better if you can suggest changes one section or paragraph at a time rather than adding such huge slabs of content which are unlikely to be non-controversial and non-problematic. The process will take as long as it takes, this is an encyclopaedia not a newspaper, so there is no rush. Melcous (talk) 07:15, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

Disclosure

This declaration should go on your user page, rather than on your talk page. It should also go on the article's talk age. Melcous (talk) 07:16, 29 November 2018 (UTC)

  ==Sockpuppet investigation==

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Ghavindeonarain, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community. Melcous (talk) 07:28, 11 December 2018 (UTC)