User talk:Samantha Bayarr

Welcome!

Hello, Samantha Bayarr, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 14:55, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

January 2015

Hello, I'm CambridgeBayWeather. I wanted to let you know that I undid one or more of your recent contributions because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Pleas don't add yourself to articles. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 15:24, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings...I made an edit to the subject "Amish Romance", and it was removed twice. My particular edit did not contain any information that differed from the other authors listed on that page. They stated selling millions of copies of their books, and I also stated selling one million copies of a particular series in its first year of publication. Sarah Price and I are both Indie authors and have been offered a contract for traditional publishing from the same publishing house, though I did not mention that, I stated I had been offered a contract, but had stayed true to being an Indie author. I do not understand why my addition to this article is considered to be promotional when it states the same FACTS as the other authors that have submitted edits to this article (or had friends do this for them). Please return my particular post, because I did not state anything in it that was not fact, and who better to present the facts about this than the author? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samantha Bayarr (talk • contribs) 22:12, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Samantha Bayarr, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Samantha Bayarr! 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! AmaryllisGardener (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:25, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Amish romance

I have removed more stuff. Thanks for pointing that out. The first material you added was sourced to Facebook and that is not usable on Wikipedia as a reference. The other authors listed appear to be notable and don't appear to have been added in a promotional way. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 22:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Once I submitted my edit without the Facebook link, you still removed it. Again, the second edit I posted did not contain anything different from the other authors listed on the page. Will you please allow the material?

Below is what I would like to post, which does not contain any information that differs from the other authors listed:

One of the most successful Indie authors in the Amish Romance genre, Samantha Bayarr, has sold more than One Million copies of her Jacob's Daughter series in its first year of publication. Self-published under her own label, Livingston Hall Publishers, since 2010, Samantha Bayarr has more than 50 books to her credit to date.

In all fairness, Beverly Lewis' novel The Shunning, is mentioned, and whoever wrote the particular edit in the "Reception" category describes the other authors as being the "most successful" (I now outsell them and rank higher on Amazon than these authors), AND states how many millions of copies they have sold, so my edit does NOT differ from theirs and is not meant to be promotional. Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samantha Bayarr (talk • contribs) 23:16, 6 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

In the section above this there is a link to the Teahouse. They are very good at helping new editors. You should ask there as this will give you a second opinion on the inclusion. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 07:30, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are the one who removed my post, I would like to settle this so I can return my post in an acceptable form. I do not see the conflict in adding an almost identical statement to what is already acceptable in that article, only difference being the names. I don't even understand why you removed the post involving Sarah Price. I think the Indie author needs to be represented here. We are both extremely well-known in this genre, and it's important for the public who isn't aware of all the facts surrounding the genre to get the whole picture, don't you? Honestly, I don 't understand why the reference to erotic fiction (Fifty Shades of Gray) was left on that article as it has NO place there, nor is it wanted by readers of Amish Romance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samantha Bayarr (talk • contribs) 15:33, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

That's why you should get a second opinion. If someone at the Teahouse says it all looks fine then I will be happy with that. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:03, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked User:Lightbreather to take a look. CambridgeBayWeather, Uqaqtuq (talk), Sunasuttuq 18:22, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Samantha. Since CambridgeBayWeather "pinged" me, I am here to help. Please let me look over the material and then I'll get back to you.

Also, please remember on discussion pages like this one to end your posts with four tildes so they will be signed and date stamped. Lightbreather (talk) 20:46, 7 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Follow-up

Samantha, I spent all afternoon working on the Amish romance article and I'm afraid I have to agree with CambridgeBayWeather that including yourself and your books in the article at this time would be promotional compared to other elements of the article. Its current citations are from the Los Angeles Review of Books, The Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, Salon, Publishers Weekly, and the Library Journal. Do you have a source of comparable quality that discusses your books or more about the self-published AR market?

I am going to get off my computer for the night now, but I'll check back in tomorrow. Lightbreather (talk) 01:49, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As Indie authors, we do not get the same perks as those who are traditionally published, and therefore, do not have access to such publications. The ONLY difference is that they have the unfair advantage of having PR pieces written about them by these magazines, and it seems you are stating that they should have a further unfair advantage to have those pieces quoted on Wikipedia. As an Indie author, I need the recognition of places like Wikipedia, to get my name out there to show the world there is more than one side being represented for this, or any other genre. It's like comparing a big movie star to the local theater. The local theater is not any less important, because most of those big stars got their start in local theaters, just the same as Indie authors can get a start as independent, and get recognition in traditional publishing later, as many have. I've been propositioned by traditional publishers, but choose to stay true to my rights as an Indie, and that is something the general public should know about. My books, though not traditionally published, have gained that recognition among the public, as evident by my rankings on Amazon, and my constant position in the number one spot on the best-seller list. The material contained in this subject is nothing less than promotional, the only difference being that the traditionally published authors have the advantage of getting these publications to promote them, whereas I have to promote myself (ie: self-publishing). The entire article is promotional, and should include representation from Indie authors such as myself and Sarah Price, as we were the FIRST Indie authors of that genre, and have been the most successful in it. I've sold a few million copies of my books, why shouldn't I be represented here by Wikipedia? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Samantha Bayarr (talk • contribs) 14:26, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner. I spent most of the day with a granddaughter.

The article is not promotional - it's about the genre. The authors that are mentioned in the article are mentioned because they 1) are mentioned in high-quality sources, 2) represent the emergence of the genre, and 3) give the article's readers an idea of the genre's popularity.

There is an external link to the Popular Amish Romance Books at Goodreads. Jacob's Ladder (#1) is listed 86th or 87th there. Granted, that's not a best-seller list. Do you have an independent, non-promotional source that discusses your books and/or Sarah Price's books as being especially remarkable in the genre or among independently published books?

Please try not to take my comments personally - they have to do with how Wikipedia editors decide what to publish, if they follow policy. Lightbreather (talk) 14:21, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't take it personally, but it is a little frustrating that as an Indie author I should have to fight so hard for the same rights of those who are traditionally published, especially when I outrank them as far as sales and popularity in the genre. But because I don't have the PR department behind me that they do, they get all the glory and recognition as if they are the only ones who write in the genre. Sarah Price and I are the "pioneers" of the Indie market in that genre, being the first two to begin self-publishing in 2010. Since that time, there has been a pretty big following, and a lot have used fake profiles and saturated the market to the point it has become a little unsavory right now. I believe that we as Indie authors have just as much right to be mentioned in that article as the other authors, as we have paved the way for the other self-published Amish Romance writers. Other than being mentioned in blogs and GoodReads, we don't have much else. Perhaps a spot on Wikipedia would pave the way for others to recognize us as legitimate, competing authors. FYI: you seem to have either mixed me up with another author, or your mention of "my" book above may simply be a typo. I wrote Jacob's Daughter, not Jacob's Ladder. I pray that you will reconsider, and see the benefit of placing me and Sarah Price in that article as being the first authors to succeed as Indie authors in that genre. As you can see, I'm not asking for promotional recognition, because if I was, I would not advocate for a competing author in my quest for addition to this article.

August 2018

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that your user subpage at User:Samantha Bayarr may not meet Wikipedia's user page guideline. If you believe that your user page does not violate our guideline, please leave a note on this page. Alternatively, you may add {{Db-u1}} to the top of the page in question and an administrator will delete it, or you can simply edit the page so that it meets Wikipedia's user page guideline.

Your userpage is a place to say a little about yourself and your Wikipedia editing activity. It is not a place for self-promotion, your CV, your autobiography or a FAKEARTICLE.

If it remains in its current state, your userpage will likely be nominated for deletion under WP:CSD#U5 or WP:CSD#G11. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 23:01, 8 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]