| Revision as of 23:29, 20 December 2007 editMark Ironie (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers33,764 edits →WP:COI guidelines: new section← Previous edit | Revision as of 00:55, 21 December 2007 edit undoCorbieVreccan (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers28,682 edits →WP:COI guidelines: clarifying Pigman's notes on COI: if you hire them, record with them, perform with them, it is still COI, even if there are sources.Next edit → | ||
| Line 38: | Line 38: | ||
| There is more that is applicable to your situation but these are definitely central to the issue. Financial interests are not the sole criteria for COI by any means. If your work advances the profile of an organization you are a part of, that is COI. If you write articles about your friends when no ] sources exists, that is COI. And when such writing contains almost nothing but your own knowledge with little in the way of supporting and verifiable sources, that is ]. I don't know why I keep posting this sort of info on your talk page. It seems I've done this several times over the last 16 months. I think I have an ideal that if the information offered and understood, of ''course'' you will do the right thing, will address the issues and alter your behaviour. ]] 23:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | There is more that is applicable to your situation but these are definitely central to the issue. Financial interests are not the sole criteria for COI by any means. If your work advances the profile of an organization you are a part of, that is COI. If you write articles about your friends when no ] sources exists, that is COI. And when such writing contains almost nothing but your own knowledge with little in the way of supporting and verifiable sources, that is ]. I don't know why I keep posting this sort of info on your talk page. It seems I've done this several times over the last 16 months. I think I have an ideal that if the information offered and understood, of ''course'' you will do the right thing, will address the issues and alter your behaviour. ]] 23:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC) | ||
| :Actually, Paul is a bit off in one of these areas: Even when there are third-party sources, it is a violation of the COI policy to write about anyone you hire for an event, per ]: | |||
| ::''"Producing promotional articles for Misplaced Pages on behalf of clients is strictly prohibited."'' | |||
| :If you hire them for your events, you cannot write articles about them on WP. It's a conflict of interest. And it is certainly COI for you to add mentions of yourself and the products you sell (tapes) to these articles. (Note - As is stated on rosencomet.com, re hiring speakers and performers, whose tapes you then sell: " is both the primary event organizer and product manufacturer for ACE." and "For speaker and workshop availablility and contact information, please contact Jeff Rosenbaum" and "A.C.E. Office MailTo: for general information, sales, and festival-related details: Jeff Rosenbaum) The only reason this has gone unnoticed for this long is you were working in an obscure area of WP. Just because it hadn't been noticed until recently doesn't mean that what you did was ok. - <font face="comic sans ms"><b>]</b> ]<font color="navy">♦</font>]</font> 00:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC) | |||
Revision as of 00:55, 21 December 2007
 Archives |
Archived talk
Hi Rosencomet, and welcome back. I archived your page for you since it was getting quite cluttered. If that's not what you want, let me know, or if you want something from the archive restored to this page, contact me. For more information bout archiving talk pages, see the link above your talk archive. —Viriditas | Talk 08:55, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
December 2007
With regard to your comments on Starwood: Please see Misplaced Pages's no personal attacks policy. Comment on content, not on contributors. Personal attacks damage the community and deter users. Note that continued personal attacks will lead to blocks for disruption. Please stay cool and keep this in mind while editing. Thank you. Please stop your personal attacks on me. It is against wikipedia policy to continue to attack me as you do. This is a warning. Mattisse 12:20, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
Mattisse
Rosencomet, I have asked Mattisse to ignore you, and I expect you to do the same to him. Please do not engage Mattisse in any way, because if you do, I will guarantee that once again you will find yourself blocked. Please listen to me on this. After having an extensive discussion with Mattisse, I realize that Mattisse is only interested in trying to block you and will continue to attempt to bait you at every level. Do not fall for it. Pretend that Mattisse does not exist no matter what Mattisse says or does. This will only make Mattisse look bad, and you will be able to file a harassment report. —Viriditas | Talk 14:34, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
User:Whpq clarification
I hope you don't mind my posting this. If you wish me to not post on your talk page, just say so and I will certainly respect your wishes. I saw your post to User:Viriditas. And I'm watching his talk page because I've been in conversation with him about something else entirely, not because of you.
Although Whpq (talk · contribs) is not an admin, uncontroversial closings of AfDs (such as the Misplaced Pages:Articles for deletion/Matthew Abelson one) can be made by anyone. Because I withdrew my nomination of the article for deletion, this is considered uncontroversial and the result is to keep the article. When articles are kept after an AfD, it is normal to put a notice on the talk page of the article saying that it had previously gone through an AfD with a link to the discussion so later editors can see the information and arguments made in the AfD. There is nothing sinister or unusual about this action. See point 7 on this Deletion Process page link to confirm this.
As to User:Whpq being a sockpuppet, I personally think this is very unlikely. The account appears to have a steady, active, and consistent editing history since early 2006. Look here. I hope this information helps you understand this particular situation. Cheers, Pigman☿ 21:28, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
WP:COI guidelines
Again, I apologize in advance if I'm imposing by posting this but a recent comment of yours indicated to me you still do not have a firm grasp of why I (and others) say you are violating Misplaced Pages conflict of interest guidelines. At the risk of boring you with material you may already have read, I'd like to post a relevant section here for your consideration.
- Self-promotion
Conflict of interest often presents itself in the form of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates.
Examples of these types of material include:
- Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites (commercial links).
- Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages.
- Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article.
Further information: Misplaced Pages:Autobiography
- Autobiography
It is not recommended to write an article about yourself. If you are notable, someone else will notice you and write the article. In some cases, Misplaced Pages users write articles about themselves when the more appropriate action would be to create a user page. In these cases, the article is normally moved into the user namespace rather than deleted. If you believe you may be notable enough, make your case on the appropriate talk pages, and seek consensus first, both with the notability and any proposed autobiography.(all bold emphasis mine)
There is more that is applicable to your situation but these are definitely central to the issue. Financial interests are not the sole criteria for COI by any means. If your work advances the profile of an organization you are a part of, that is COI. If you write articles about your friends when no verifiable sources exists, that is COI. And when such writing contains almost nothing but your own knowledge with little in the way of supporting and verifiable sources, that is original research. I don't know why I keep posting this sort of info on your talk page. It seems I've done this several times over the last 16 months. I think I have an ideal that if the information offered and understood, of course you will do the right thing, will address the issues and alter your behaviour. Pigman☿ 23:29, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Actually, Paul is a bit off in one of these areas: Even when there are third-party sources, it is a violation of the COI policy to write about anyone you hire for an event, per WP:COI#Promotional article production on behalf of clients:
- "Producing promotional articles for Misplaced Pages on behalf of clients is strictly prohibited."
- If you hire them for your events, you cannot write articles about them on WP. It's a conflict of interest. And it is certainly COI for you to add mentions of yourself and the products you sell (tapes) to these articles. (Note - As is stated on rosencomet.com, re hiring speakers and performers, whose tapes you then sell: " is both the primary event organizer and product manufacturer for ACE." and "For speaker and workshop availablility and contact information, please contact Jeff Rosenbaum" and "A.C.E. Office MailTo: for general information, sales, and festival-related details: Jeff Rosenbaum) The only reason this has gone unnoticed for this long is you were working in an obscure area of WP. Just because it hadn't been noticed until recently doesn't mean that what you did was ok. - Kathryn NicDhàna ♫♦♫ 00:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)