User talk:Lem4
You need to read both of these and stop editing the article directly. You need to request changes on the talk page. YODADICAE👽 13:52, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm sorry, why should I not edit the article directly? I am the rep of this company, and am authorized to edit the page as often as needed in all languages. The content there is not spam, all back with facts, cites, etc. All can be verified instead of just deleted. Maybe a random editor should ask for changes in the talk page, and not the official rep of a brand, wdyt?
Also what's the paid/coi thing? Lem4 (talk) 14:00, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- You should read the links I've provided you. YODADICAE👽 14:01, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- You should as well, 2 of the 3 requested places exist there. I have it stated in my user page as well as in the SW page itself. (a statement on your user page,
a statement on the talk page accompanying any paid contributions, or a statement in the edit summary accompanying any paid contributions.)
- It covers more than just the required disclosure. It means like every other editor, you're not permitted to add copyright violations or promotional materials and you should refrain from editing articles for which you are paid or have a conflict of interest directly. YODADICAE👽 14:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Changing the brand name to appear properly and updating the details is in no way a conflict of interest, and actually should be done by reps of the brand (unless trustworthy & non-copyright data means using 3rd party numbers). The intro did not have any promo materials. I can understand what you're referring to regarding how it looked in "the platform", but there as well not promotional. Nonetheless these tweaks should be what comes up in the convo, no undoing updates that come from the source.
- Yeah, that's not how any of this works. I encourage you, again, to re-read the relevant policies i've linked because your view on this is not compatible with editing currently. YODADICAE👽 14:18, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Read them, and again - I don't think it's right. I understand the need to keep it non promotional, but if you want to not be outdated these guidelines should be re-inspected (btw Wiki has no SEO value anymore, so let it go, it's just an asset in brand search [which is why SEOs are stuck with it], not a link source or anything else - so get over it). I would have fixed it if you had commented instead of deleting, shame. Will request an edit here later on with a revised text from our brand team. Lem4 (talk) 14:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- you repeating the same incorrection statement does not change what I am saying. Stop adding spam and copyright violations. We aren't interested in anything your brand team has to say, only what independent reliable sources say. YODADICAE👽 14:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- I'm not saying you will change them, I'm just stating they make no sense. Maybe they did years ago, but being a source of outdated info is a problem. As I said, since the value is not accurate to what the tool is and does - I will be asking for more revisions. Lem4 (talk) 14:45, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- you repeating the same incorrection statement does not change what I am saying. Stop adding spam and copyright violations. We aren't interested in anything your brand team has to say, only what independent reliable sources say. YODADICAE👽 14:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Read them, and again - I don't think it's right. I understand the need to keep it non promotional, but if you want to not be outdated these guidelines should be re-inspected (btw Wiki has no SEO value anymore, so let it go, it's just an asset in brand search [which is why SEOs are stuck with it], not a link source or anything else - so get over it). I would have fixed it if you had commented instead of deleting, shame. Will request an edit here later on with a revised text from our brand team. Lem4 (talk) 14:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's not how any of this works. I encourage you, again, to re-read the relevant policies i've linked because your view on this is not compatible with editing currently. YODADICAE👽 14:18, 25 May 2021 (UTC)
- Changing the brand name to appear properly and updating the details is in no way a conflict of interest, and actually should be done by reps of the brand (unless trustworthy & non-copyright data means using 3rd party numbers). The intro did not have any promo materials. I can understand what you're referring to regarding how it looked in "the platform", but there as well not promotional. Nonetheless these tweaks should be what comes up in the convo, no undoing updates that come from the source.
- It covers more than just the required disclosure. It means like every other editor, you're not permitted to add copyright violations or promotional materials and you should refrain from editing articles for which you are paid or have a conflict of interest directly. YODADICAE👽 14:04, 25 May 2021 (UTC)