User talk:Teammetz

Welcome!

Hello, Teammetz, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of 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)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion 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 {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Marcel Douwe Dekker (talk) 22:35, 3 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

September 2012

Hello, Teammetz. 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 need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

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.

Mr Ollie, Thank-you for updating me on the importance of neutrality regarding external references. I do need your help understanding a few items. First, please reconsider, or at least explain to me: 1) Why you deleted the following statement from "Facilitator." You deleted the factual statement that "This is most noticeable during periods of organisational change when facilitators need the sponsorship of senior management." 2) Why is the remaining external reference (ie, name=Wherrett>Wherrett, R. The Compleat Biz, (2009) Reroq Publishing ISBN 978-0-9561305-0-1) more valid than the more recently published name=Attong>Attong, M. and Metz, T. Change or Die—The Business Process Improvement Manual, (2012) CRC Press ISBN 978-1-4665-1251-1 from a publisher with a known, scientific background in publishing? and, 3) Might you also take a moment to explain why you deleted the following statement from the term "Consensus decision-making" - "Business process improvement methods frequently rely on consensus for decision-making support because complex business processes affect various stakeholder groups."? T-Metz (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC) (continued below)[reply]

It is unfortunate that a WIKI 'master' such as yourself seems predisposed to prefer external references whose title includes the content being referenced. The select few times that I referenced "Change or Die" were highly appropriate and well supported by the book, to the benefit of readers seeking more information on the topic. It's not like I went out and pasted the "Change or Die" reference in hundreds or even dozens of places. The few references provided were appropriate and well intended for the reader. I can give you page numbers from the book if you doubt the value of the few references made, out of millions of potential Wiki topics. I am frankly shocked that you deleted the reference in "Deliverable" because I could not find anywhere in the Five WIKI Pillars that valid references might not be attached to each sentence or claim, and if there is more than one, so be it. I think your fear of COI would be valid if there was an abuse of the reference, which clearly there is not. For example, the term "Consensus decision-making" has 62 references and "Change or Die" is a more current and valid reference than most of the 62 but you deleted it anyway, to the harm of some readers. While it's clear that you will not allow me to reference Change or Die—The Business Process Improvement Manual anymore, at least be kind and neutral yourself about some of the content adds or fixes I suggest. For example, it would helpful to understand how "14. ^ Ludy, Perry J. Profit Building: Cutting Costs Without Cutting People. San Francisco: Berret-Koehler, Inc, 2000. Print." the 14th reference in "brainstorming" offers readers more value than your deletions discussed above. T-Metz (talk) 17:32, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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. MrOllie (talk) 14:17, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I am forced to stop directing hundreds of links to WIKI from my blog site until I have a clearer understanding, not about the COI references, but the content edits discussed above that seemingly fell prey to a halo effect from the COI deletions.

June 2020

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Responsibility assignment matrix. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. [1] MrOllie (talk) 13:39, 13 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]