User talk:VonWhiskersTheThird

This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding the Wikipedia article Eric Reprid.

Welcome!

Hi VonWhiskersTheThird! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! I dream of horses (t) (c) Remember to {{ping}} me after replying off my talk page 20:14, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eric Reprid (February 17)

Your recent article submission has been rejected. If you have further questions, you can ask at the Articles for creation help desk or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help. The reason left by Theroadislong was: This topic is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia.

Theroadislong (talk) 17:31, 17 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Eric Reprid has been accepted

Eric Reprid, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

The article has been assessed as Stub-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. It is commonplace for new articles to start out as stubs and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thanks again, and happy editing!

Bearcat (talk) 15:29, 1 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, VonWhiskersTheThird. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Eric Reprid, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest 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, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Please declare your conflict of interest, properly and in accordance with the guidelines--thank you. Drmies (talk) 01:56, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Drmies, I have no conflict of interest with the artist; he simply messaged me on gmail and asked politely that I use another photo instead. Please note that the original use of the photo was perfectly fine with the artist ― I messaged him before creating the Wikipedia page asking him if he would be okay if I created a Wikipedia page on him using the image, and he gave his approval. He did not ask me to write an article for him nor did he suggest/dictate what the contents should be; I created it of my own volition. The only suggestion he made was that I change that particular photo, which I did at his request, seeing as it was (in my mind) a reasonable change that did not violate Wikipedia's conflict of interest standards.VonWhiskersTheThird (talk) 02:11, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You do have a conflict of interest, and it is obvious from your words, so go ahead and declare it properly. Whether the edits are good or bad or whatever is completely immaterial, and whether you get paid or not is also immaterial. Read the policy, and follow the guidelines, please. If you don't, I will have to block you. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 02:14, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
- I took the time to read the COI policy and guidelines again, and I am still confused as to how my revision violated COI ― the only violation I can think of is by changing the image at his request, but wouldn't that fall under bullet point two (adding an independent reliable source) of making an uncontroversial edit? If my revision did violate COI, then I will fully declare it, but I would be appreciative if you could tell me why.VonWhiskersTheThird (talk) 02:38, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  - There is nothing complicated about this. You have a relationship with the subject of an article. That is all there is to it. It's right there in the first paragraph. It's not a judgment on your edit or on your behavior. Drmies (talk) 03:57, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    - Alright, I have disclosed the conflict of interest on both my user page and on the article page. Is there anything else I should do? Thank you for your help. VonWhiskersTheThird (talk) 15:33, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Eric Reprid

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Eric Reprid, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 22:56, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Justlettersandnumbers, may I ask why the page has been tagged for speedy deletion? The subject appears to be notable enough, having received a Juno Nomination. VonWhiskersTheThird (talk) 22:44, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course – see above, "because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic". Speedy was declined by Ritchie333, btw. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, thank you. After taking a step back and looking things over, I think the best option is for me to cease editing the page as to prevent further controversy. Since the article does meet notability, though, I'm going to make one last edit by taking down the notability banner on the page (if that violates guidelines, though, I'll reinstate it). Thank you again for your help, you've been one of the few reasonable people on this site. VonWhiskersTheThird (talk) 20:03, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]