User talk:OrdinaryPlanetMan

November 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to André Marin has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: André Marin was changed by OrdinaryPlanetMan (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.881816 on 2017-11-29T21:41:22+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:41, 29 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

WP:PAID/WP:COI

Please read and follow. Thanks Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:55, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copy and pasting

We run "copy and paste" detection software on new edits. One of your edits appear to be infringing on someone else's copyright. See also Wikipedia:Copy-paste. We at Wikipedia usually require paraphrasing. If you own the copyright to this material please follow the directions at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials to grant license. Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 23:56, 2 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/auditor-general-report-ex-military-ombudsman-s-conduct-inappropriate-1.3051917

Mandatory paid editing disclosure

Hello OrdinaryPlanetMan. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, 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:OrdinaryPlanetMan. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=OrdinaryPlanetMan|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. Jytdog (talk) 14:40, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply at my talk page, here.

Please disclose any connection you have with Marin. Please reply here, to keep this discussion in one place. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 15:41, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I am André Marin. My own interest is having a balance and fair profile on Wikipedia. What is posted on my Wikipedia is junk. For another example, check out footnote 3. The footnote remains but it was relating to a book from the University of Toronto Press that "He (me) has become the model of ombudsmanship in Canada." Someone vandalized my post by deleting the favourable quote but forgot to delete the reference.

If you are not prepared to present a balanced profile of me, I'd prefer to be deleted from WP entirely. It is simply unacceptable that every single word I added was removed. All that's left leaves the impression that I was sued successfully, that I am somehow guilty of misbehaviour etc. All of which is wrong. I'm prepared to work at it, but you need to give me a chance.OrdinaryPlanetMan (talk) 16:20, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for disclosing that. I assume that you are familiar with the concept of "conflict of interest"; that concept functions in Wikipedia as well, and we have a way to manage this. Please stop editing directly until you understand how we manage COI in Wikipedia. I will explain below. Jytdog (talk) 18:19, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Andr%C3%A9_Marin#Delete_page? Lurker9999 (talk) 07:20, 21 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note on using talk pages

Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions about a single topic, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and so on, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. Threading/indenting also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit. That is how we know who said what to whom and when.

Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).

I know this is unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on.Jytdog (talk) 18:22, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

So... I spend time working on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing. I am not an administrator.

Thanks for disclosing above that you are André Marin. Because Marin is a public figure, please don't be surprised if someone asks you to verify your identity. (On the internet, no one knows you are dog, and people do show up here pretending to be other people -- see ~~WP:REALNAME~~ WP:IMPERSONATE) I will however take you at your word.

Lots of people come to Wikipedia with some sort of conflict of interest and are not aware of how the editing community defines and manages conflict of interest. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, OrdinaryPlanetMan. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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 COI 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.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. Unmanaged conflicts of interest can also lead to people behaving in ways that violate our behavioral policies and cause disruption in the normal editing process. Managing conflict of interest well, also protects conflicted editors themselves - please see WP:Wikipedia is in the real world, and Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for some guidance and stories about people who have brought bad press upon themselves through unmanaged conflict of interest editing.

As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do.

To finish the disclosure piece, would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:OrdinaryPlanetMan - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple like: "I am André Marin and am primarily interested in the article about me. I acknowledge my conflict of interest on topics related to me." would be fine. If you want to add anything else there that is relevant to what you want to do in WP feel free to add it, but please don't add anything promotional about yourself (see WP:USERPAGE for guidance if you like).

A tag has already been added at Talk:André Marin, so the disclosure is done there. Once you disclose on your user page, the disclosure piece of this will be done.

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask of editors who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to

(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page (this is already done at the Marin article, as I noted above); and

(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section on the talk page, put the proposed content there formatted just as you would if you were adding it directly to the article, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) place the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review. In general it should be relatively short so that it is not too much review at once. Sometimes editors propose complete rewrites, providing a link to their sandbox for example. This is OK to do but please be aware that it is lot more for volunteers to process and will probably take longer.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies.

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time. Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work on the Marin article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 18:33, 16 October 2018 (UTC) (redacted a bit Jytdog (talk) 19:09, 16 October 2018 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks for your advice. It's a lot to digest. I'll proceed as you suggested and let you know if I have any more questions. Best, AndréOrdinaryPlanetMan (talk) 18:42, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Yes I know it is a lot; you have to get oriented as to how Wikipedia works at all, as well as how we manage conflict of interest. Please take your time, and be patient with yourself and other people as you get familiar with this place.

(I indented your comment, as you forgot to. Do see the section above, about using talk pages). Jytdog (talk) 19:01, 16 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]