User talk:JayHedegard

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Graywalls (talk) 17:26, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure of employment

Hello JayHedegard. 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 Outside In (organization), 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 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:JayHedegard. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=JayHedegard|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. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:01, 10 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Reply from Jay Hedegard: Hello Drm310. Sorry, I'm not sure if I am replying to this correctly. I have not been compensated in any way for the edits I made to the Outside In page nor was I directed to do so by the organization. Thanks. Jay — Preceding unsigned comment added by JayHedegard (talk • contribs)

Thanks for clarifying. However you still appear to have a connection to this organization, so I advise you to avoid making edits to the article directly. You should instead use the {{request edit}} template on the article talk page to suggest changes for other neutral third party editors to review. I would also recommend that you place the {{UserboxCOI}} template on your userpage, User:JayHedegard. This will show other editors that you are editing in good faith; other editors will appreciate your transparency and be more willing to help you. Thanks. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Question concerning an edit at Outside In article

Hello, I am wondering about the inaccuracy you noted in the edit comment when you removed a mention regarding unionization at Outside In in this edit. In https://nwlaborpress.org/2018/05/outside-in/, it says "The union election took place May 15-16, and the result was an overwhelming 88 to 18 vote in favor of unionizing." so I believe it was an accurate statement or something of a minor wording issue. Graywalls (talk) 14:19, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Response from Jay: Hello Graywalls, thanks for asking. I truly appreciate it. I probably should have suggested a different wording as it really is more of a minor edit. Outside In has approximately 170 paid staff and approximately 400 volunteers. The Wiki stated "the workers of Outside In voted to unionize", implying that all of them voted for unionization and joined. A more accurate statement might be "88 members of the paid staff voted to unionize." -Jay — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.21.138.190 (talk) 21:18, 13 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Although its likely you're the same person who replied to the warning posted by another editor, to avoid confusion, please sign-in and post from your account so we all now it isn't from a random person who came across your page. Graywalls (talk) 08:51, 14 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops. :) Here it is again. Response from Jay: Hello Graywalls, thanks for asking. I truly appreciate it. I probably should have suggested a different wording as it really is more of a minor edit. Outside In has approximately 170 paid staff and approximately 400 volunteers. The Wiki stated "the workers of Outside In voted to unionize", implying that all of them voted for unionization and joined. A more accurate statement might be "88 members of the paid staff voted to unionize." -Jay— Preceding unsigned comment added by JayHedegard (talk • contribs)

JayHedegard, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:54, 2 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]