User talk:Mark EtageNoir

Mark EtageNoir, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mark EtageNoir! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! Dathus (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:15, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Parov Stelar. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. The Dissident Aggressor 21:27, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Parov Stelar, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. The Dissident Aggressor 18:42, 8 September 2014

We see what you are saying and we want to work hard to get everything Wikipedia conform.. However my affiliation with Parov Stelar will stay the same. Thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ‎ Mark EtageNoir (talk • contribs) 21:42, 8 September 2014

Marcus, perhaps you should refrain from editing articles to which you have such a strong affiliation. The Dissident Aggressor 02:27, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not Marcus but Mark from Parov Stelar management. I think it's our job to get Wikipedia right. The Wikipedia entry before had poor sources also and was poorly written, but nobody said anything. Now that we want to get everything right, we are running into problems. Who else than management of an artist should do that? Will work on the page today. Best, Mark

Oh and one more question please: Can we go back to the version before I started editing the page? Let's say to a version from mid August? For now that would be the best option for us to get rid of all the warnings on top of the page. And then I will start all over step by step. Sounds good? Thank you.

Hi there. For the sake of a clean Wikipedia page I now changed everything back to a version of mid August that was approved by Wikipedia and which wasn't set up by the Parov Stelar Management, but by an outside person. So let's start from there. From now on, if I make changes I will stick to your policy. Thanks and Best, Mark — Preceding unsigned comment added by 91.217.119.254 (talk) 14:59, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is no "approved version" of an article. However editing an article with such a strong WP:COI can be very problematic. It's difficult to maintain a neutral point of view as is clear in this case. We have lots of pages cautioning folks from doing this. I would really encourage you to start reading them and following their advice. If your disruption on that article continues, I will ask for you to be blocked from editing wikipedia or a topic ban imposed, however the latter seems rather pointless, since you appear to be a WP:SPA rather than here to build an encyclopedia. The Dissident Aggressor 16:03, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

One more question please: You are saying that I cannot even go back to a version that wasn't a problem for you in the first place? And now it would be a problem to go back to this version? That's not comprehensible for me. Please explaion. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.114.172.87 (talk) 16:33, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Mark EtageNoir. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. The Dissident Aggressor 18:42, 8 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove the maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Parov Stelar. The Dissident Aggressor 15:44, 9 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for edit-warring, promotion, WP:TE. You are a representative of the person, and should NEVER be editing articles about them due to WP:COI. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. the panda ₯’ 13:01, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]