User talk:UCP28262

THANK YOU! I see what you mean now. And people think editing wikipedia is a one-step process. ;) You are correct - I took the content from our webpage. I understand what you are saying about promotional vs. neutral. I am going to try again, and see if I can comply with the guidelines a bit better. University City Partners (talk) 20:24, 30 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners[reply]

Ok - I'm going to try to do this correctly. Please be patient if I mess up. :) I'm not sure where to put some of what you have asked me...so...here goes. conflict of interest University City Partners is the name of a the municipal tax district that oversees the University City area in Charlotte North Carolina. We don't know by who or when this page was generated, but information contained on it was (a) outdated (b) inaccurate. We do not sell anything, nor is there any competing project or project. The edits on the page are accurate and update and represent the area in a factual manner. Please accept my edits, or show me how to do this more correctly. Thank you! University City Partners (talk) 20:03, 30 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners[reply]

Thank you for this :-) The main problem with your edits is that they are not neutrally written. Talking about a "highly educated workforce" which "eagerly fill Charlotte’s workforce pipeline", or about "a healthy mix of affordable housing" (to take a few examples) is promotional, not neutral. Wikipedia articles should not read as invites to visit a place, they should give the facts in a neutral tone. Secondly, pretty much all the text was sourced to one and the same website, which appears to be one you are affiliated with judging by the url. Please try to find secondary sources for your information. I'm sorry to have to roll back your edits wholesale, because I recognise that the old version is a bit outdated, but there were simply too many issues with the new version. It might be a good idea to work on one section at a time, instead of changing the entire article at once.

If you have questions about editing, the Wikipedia tea house is a good place to ask them. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 20:08, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, University City Partners. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article University City (Charlotte neighborhood), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 19:47, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Is this how I respond back? This is my first time editing anything on wikipedia and I'm trying to follow the guidelines but there is so much to learn, and I have no idea how to answer your concerns. University City Partners (talk) 19:53, 30 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners.[reply]

Hi University City Partners. You should bring up concerns with the article on the article's talk page. Each Wikipedia article has a "talk page", a forum where Wikipedia editors discuss proposed changes to articles that have proven controversial. Specifically, go to Talk:University City (Charlotte neighborhood) and post an edit request with the edit request template. Be sure to disclose your conflict of interest as described above. Be as specific as possible, so post specific wordings with the format "after sentence WXYZ, please insert the sentence ABC" or "please remove QQQ and replace it with RRR." Be sure to support the requested change with a reliable source. If there is any possibility that the claim you are making is disputable, use a source other than your website or the website of anyone who has a financial connection to your business (for example, your agent). For example, a claim by the website of Tesla Motors that Elon Musk is their CEO can be trusted, as Tesla would have no incentive to misrepresent that fact. On the other hand, an event such as "an FDA investigation cleared XYZ Inc. of wrongdoing" could be interpreted differently depending on the source, so Wikipedia cannot take XYZ's word for it. If you have any questions, you can ask me, ask a question at the Tea House forum for new editors, or ask at the conflict of interest noticeboard. Thanks, Altamel (talk) 20:11, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

May 2016

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to University City (Charlotte neighborhood). While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. bonadea contributions talk 20:04, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did to University City (Charlotte neighborhood) with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. — Music1201 ^talk 21:48, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ummmm...I'm really sorry? I don't know what I am doing wrong that warranted this warning. talk suggested that I make edits in sections, which is what I'm trying to do. Please help me to understand what I'm doing wrong? I'm trying to fix what I did earlier. University City Partners (talk) 21:51, 30 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners[reply]

Hi there. I reverted your edit on University City (Charlotte neighborhood) as it looks like you were looking for the article's talk page. This can be found by clicking on the "Talk" link in the upper left hand corner of every article. Requested edits should go there. You placed the request in the actual live article by mistake. ~~Don't worry though. I moved it over for you.~~(See below regarding copyright violation) If you have any questions about this please leave me a message on my talk page.

On a separate note, there may be a problem with your username. Wikipedia usernames should not imply shared use. Yours seems to imply this (as it is the name of an organization) and could be a violation of our username policy. Would you mind submitting a request to change it? You can do so here: Special:GlobalRenameRequest. Thanks and if you have any questions on this please let me know. --Majora (talk) 22:38, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Addendum made --Majora (talk) 23:42, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: University City Partners (May 30)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by 333-blue was:

This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage about the subject in reliable sources that are independent of the subject—see the general guideline on notability and the golden rule. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to User:University City Partners/sandbox/University City Partners and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

333 -blue 23:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! University City Partners, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! 333 -blue 23:13, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Your possible association with University City

Please tell us if you are associated with University City anything. Is editing these articles part of your job? Thanks. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:25, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Possible copyright violation(s)

I have encountered possible copyright violation(s). Content you added in a recent edit to University City (Charlotte neighborhood) appears to have been copy pasted from this source and has been removed. Their site says "...Permission is granted to download any of the materials (information) on the University City Partners’ web site solely for your commercial use. ...you may not modify the materials without the University City Partners’ written consent...resell our materials for any commercial purpose...transfer the materials or mirror the materials on any other server...."

Please remember that you must write in your own words. We cannot copy and paste from other websites. If I have made an error, please accept my apologies.

For further information, please read Wikipedia:Copyright violations. If you have questions, please ask. Best wishes, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:

Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

Okay, you refer to yourself as "we" and say you were "tasked" with fixing the article.[1] I think it is pretty clear that you are employed by that organization. You were asked to disclose this on 19:47, 30 May 2016 and have made several more edits on behalf of your employer since without disclosing. You have added promotional and copyrighted materials to articles. You should not be editing any articles with which you have a conflict of interest. Your username even represents your organization. I also suspect that this account may have been used as a group account. I am blocking this account. Do not worry about the article. Others can edit it. If you are interested in helping to build the encyclopedia without adding any content related to you or your organization please let me know and I will happily unblock you. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 23:58, 30 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

UCP28262 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

(See below)

Decline reason:

I am sure you have been editing in good faith, and I sympathise with you over how confusing and intimidating Wikipedia can sometimes be for new editors. However, the fact remains that you are clearly here for the purpose of promotion, which is contrary to Wikipedia policy. Your editing has been full of such marketing-speak as "Anchored in education and fueled by innovation", "a magnet to firms looking to ship goods quickly and easily", "an easy destination and starting point for businesses", and so on. That is not simply correcting or updating information which is "inaccurate and/or outdated"; it is pure marketing-speak, designed to impress the reader with how good "University City" is. Furthermore, what you have written makes it clear that you do not understand that your editing was promotional, and that you are therefore unlikely to do anything different. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:58, 1 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

(talk)Anna, I am sorry if I am violating guidelines. As should be clear from multiple conversations I have had over the past several hours, I am doing my best to be in compliance and have made the changes requested. I also didn't realize it wasn't clear that I am doing this on behalf of University City Partners; I certainly never tried to hide that (ergo, the user name). (For the record, I am actually not an employee but an independent contractor they hired to update the content on this wikipedia page, but I certainly am affiliated. I apologize if that wasn't clear in the many conversations that have occurred today. And to clarify - this is NOT a group account and no one else is using this account but me.) As previously noted, no one knows who created the page and the information on it is outdated and inaccurate. This is me trying to put current and accurate information on this page.

Once one of the editors pointed me in the direction of the articles on neutrality, I read them and made the appropriate changes (at least, I thought I did.) Next, I was told to do a "request edit" b/c I have a conflict of interest, so I did that. I want to work within the guidelines here, and I'm not sure how I have offended you. What I have submitted as edits were factual; and when you indicated you thought I was copying and pasting, I asked where I had gone wrong so I could correct it as I tried very hard to present content (and cite sources that were unrelated to University City Partners as directed by one of the editors). I know you deal with probably thousands of people everyday, so I can imagine it gets frustrating, but I'm asking for help and guidance, not trying to work around the system. I am also completely confused about "adding templates" which is what all the help files tell me to do, but I don't see where to Add a Template anywhere. University City Partners (talk) 00:16, 31 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners[reply]

You haven't offended me and this is nothing personal. It is just that you are an undeclared paid editor who was asked to declare but didn't, plus the other reasons I state above. I will let another administrator review this and decide. I am fine with any decision that they make. Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:25, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Frodesiak (talk):Thank you, Anna. And I'm waiting for my username to be changed, as I indicated above. I know your job can't be easy, and I understand this looked bad - but truly, only because I am trying to learn how to do this and am making mistakes. University City Partners (talk) 00:30, 31 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners[reply]

You sound like a nice person, so I am sorry about all of this. The thing is, we do not like WP:COI editing very much, or its worst form, paid editing. Unfortunately, that is you. Again, nothing personal. Also, articles get along just fine without forprofit organizations using their money to make articles look good. If there is a problem with an article, editors with no connection to the subject should be the ones to edit it. Company people can point it out. We should make the changes. :) Anna Frodesiak (talk) 00:37, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Anna Frodesiak (talk): I do understand what you are saying...in this case, I'm not trying to make their articles look good, but rather to provide correct information. We don't even sell anything at all; there is no product to promote, just information to disseminate. I am genuinely interested - what do nonprofits do when the information is inaccurate and/or outdated? Who do we go to in order to point out the changes that need to be made? My goal is get accurate data out there - I will do whatever I am directed to do to do that. Short of finding someone on the street (grinning) and asking them to update this information, what should I do? University City Partners (talk) 00:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)University City Partners[reply]

I know you are trying to provide accurate information, but why? Not to promote but just to disseminate information? No. To promote, of course. I've read your employer's website. University City Partner's mission is to promote University City and draw tax-paying residents and businesses to it. That is why they hired you, of course. At this point, I do not know what you should do. Another administrator will decide. Either way, COI editors are not the preferred people to improve articles. Regular, unassociated Wikipedia editors are here to do that. I suggest you tell your employers that. Best, Anna Frodesiak (talk) 03:31, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Summation of advice

Hello again. I see that unfortunately, you have been blocked. Wikipedia is a rather confusing place due to its litany of policies, and starting out can be rough. I'm going to do my best to explain the most important rules you have to follow below.

Special rules for conflict of interest editors: These rules apply specifically to editors with a conflict of interest, those who have been hired or paid by an organization to edit articles.

For transparency, editors with a conflict of interest must disclose (read policy here) who they have been hired by.
- If you are not being paid to edit the article, fill out the following code and place it at the top of the talk page of each article that you edit. {{Connected contributor|User1=Your username |U1-declared=yes| |U1-otherlinks=Insert relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts or diffs showing COI contributions.}}
- If you are being paid to edit the article, your disclosure is slightly different. Use the following code, and place it at the top of the talk page of each article that you edit.{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=Username of the paid editor|U1-employer=Name of person/organization that is paying for the edits|U1-client= Name of client|U1-otherlinks=Insert diff to disclosure on your User page.}} In addition, please disclose that you are a paid editor on your userpage, and list each article on which you have worked or intend to work for pay (even if you confine yourself to the talk page), naming the employer and client for each article. Please do this in a clearly visible way.
Directly editing articles as a paid editor is strongly discouraged (policy link). This means that instead of directly editing an article, you should propose changes on the article's discussion page with the {{request edit}} template. For example, the talk page of the article University City is at Talk:University_City_(Charlotte_neighborhood). This is what Anna meant when she said "Company people can point it out. We should make the changes." Here is an example of a well formatted edit request. As I mentioned above, be sure to propose specific wordings so that whoever reviews the talk page can understand your suggestions. When you use the {{request edit}} template, you make your requested edit visible on a central list monitored by Wikipedia editors. That's how editors are alerted to your request for help.

Rules all editors must follow: This is not an exhaustive list of policies, but just ones you have encountered already.

Username policy: be sure to ask for a different username that does not sound like a shared company account. Administrators will not unblock you until you propose a different username, but I have not seen you propose a specific alternative on this page (if you did, but I didn't notice, apologies.) A username along the lines of "YourName@University City Partners" is acceptable.
Copyright policy: we cannot use text that is copied or closely paraphrased (policy link) from copyrighted sources. Wikipedia is an open-source project: we are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License, which permits our readers to reuse our text for whatever purpose they desire. This means you must rewrite the text in your own words, which has the added benefit of maintaining a consistent editorial tone across Wikipedia's articles.
Neutral point of view: basically, there are phrases that are commonly used in press releases that have a very promotional tone. Bonadea explained this well above. Those phrases don't fit with Wikipedia's editorial voice. They should be rewritten so that they have no indication of bias.

Hope this helps. Altamel (talk) 02:02, 31 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]