User talk:Henrietta894

August 2013

Hello, Rhpwikichicken. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Red Hen Press, 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. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 22:08, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Rhpwikichicken. 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 COI 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 (you can use 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, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 16:18, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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. – Broccoli & Coffee ^{(Oh hai)} 16:32, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Undisclosed paid editing

Hello Rhpwikichicken. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, 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:Rhpwikichicken. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Rhpwikichicken|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) 18:07, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

July 2019

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy or request a change of username.

You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. Additionally, If you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text

{{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}

at the bottom of your talk page. Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names.

Thank you. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 20:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sharing accounts, as you admitted here, is expressly forbidden (see this policy), ~~as is paid editing without disclosing who is paying you (as per this policy).~~ Please create a new account that represents only you as an individual. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 20:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Filelakeshoe: Just FYI, the discussion on my talk page shows that there is not a paid relationship in this case. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:50, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the ping, not sure how I missed that, redacted the paid editing info. Still encourage volunteers for this organisation to edit from their own accounts. – filelakeshoe (t / c) 🐱 20:53, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Filelakeshoe, my understanding of the WP:PAID policy is that if it's being done on behalf of an org, it still counts even if it's volunteering - "Interns, on-loan staff, and unpaid workers, including volunteers, are deemed to be employees. If they are directed or expected to edit Wikipedia as part of their tasks, they must make a paid-contribution disclosure." Either way, they'll of course need to disclose the relationship. creffett (talk) 22:37, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Creffett, I guess the outstanding question is: was this person directed or expected to make the edits, or were they doing it out of their own personal motivation? I suppose one could argue that if the account access was passed from one person to another, then it was expected they would use it to edit for their organization's purposes = paid. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 01:28, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed, unblocked, courtesy ping to filelakeshoe (and, given the follow-up points, GeneralNotability & Drm310) - Cabayi (talk) 06:27, 29 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]