User talk:Iamthekanadian

Welcome!

Welcome!

Hello, Iamthekanadian, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Simplified Manual of Style
• Your first article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
• Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
• and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Beeblebrox (talk) 23:32, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Iamthekanadian. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 WP:Spam);
• 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. I'm also guessing that you operated some of the accounts that previously contributed to the article in question. It is fairly important to use only one account to edit in a single topic area , so please stick to just this one account. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:36, 27 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Beeblebrox I declared the conflict of interest the moment I understood how to do it. I would be happy not to contribute to the LiveWorkPlay article at all, but unfortunately the circumstances are that the original article (which no, I never worked on) was deleted, and my request for undelete (so I could help address the deficiencies) did not go forward, so it was recommended to me to start the article from scratch. I can't see how that would happen without me helping to get it started, and I immediately asked for help from others after doing so, for their guidance on neutrality and other essential factors. I ran into a situation where I was forced into a disclosure as a "paid contributor" even though I most definitely am not (I read the policy on that several times and it does not apply) but it was made clear to me that I either make that declaration or have the article deleted. I think the article looks great, and it is indeed very encyclopedic thanks to some of the help I received (but also, it was important for the very purposes of accuracy and objective fact that I was involved, as some of the edits were inaccuracies related to lack of understanding about the field). Iamthekanadian (talk) 14:42, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Iamthekanadian, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Iamthekanadian! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Cordless Larry (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:02, 28 May 2021 (UTC)

AfC notification: Draft:LiveWorkPlay has a new comment

I've left a comment on your Articles for Creation submission, which can be viewed at Draft:LiveWorkPlay. Thanks! -bɜ:ʳkənhɪmez (User/say hi!) 03:30, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: LiveWorkPlay (May 29)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Loksmythe was:  The comment the reviewer left was: 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 Draft:LiveWorkPlay and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:LiveWorkPlay, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Loksmythe (talk) 15:52, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

OK

OK. Yes we are making progress. I made some edits, and stopped in the middle as I'm busy, I'll try to come back in a day or two (of course, you can work on it the meantime). So, we want to scrub away anything that looks remotely promotional. Anything that sounds like praise, including mention of awards, we need to move out of the main line of the the article, and into the "Awards and recognition" section.

To be honest the awards all look like local log-rolling, something to do at your annual dinner. If we even including them, we want to segregate them in the "Awards" section. I started rendering it as prose rather than a list to further tone it down.

The awards don't really help with notability (that is attained by having articles written about you) and they count against the article for making it look promotional. It's possible we should remove them altogether, since after all they are kind of almost damning with faint praise, being so local and all. Probably keep tho, I guess.

Yeah it looks like with more work the article will be fine and fly thru approval. Needs more work. I can get back to it within the next few days. Don't submit it again til we're all done. To be continued.

Answer me right here, right below this. I am watching this page and will see it. Herostratus (talk) 20:19, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. The requirement for "notability" but not "promotional" is extremely confusing to me. And seems subjective. The Best Ottawa Business Awards is huge. This is a city of 1 million with like 10,000 charities and only 1 gets that award. The Top 40 Under 40 almost never recognizes anyone who works for charities. United Way Community Builder of the Year is huge - only 3 each year, goes up permanently at city hall... not sure what is expected for nonprofits we don't get Oscars. Anyway this process is beating me down and making me feel like crap - being accused of getting paid for this, people bickering about that, talking about spammy and promotional - to me it's just the organization does, references that show this to be true, and references that show third parties recognized it. I obviously don't understand how this works so those of you that do, by all means, of you can help me, rip out what needs ripping, I am not "doing it wrong" on purpose. It's not so easy to understand what is expected. Iamthekanadian (talk) 03:57, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

External links

Hello. Just a heads up that it is not acceptable to add inline links like this to the body of an article. Thanks.--- Possibly (talk) 20:43, 29 May 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. No bad intent. Iamthekanadian (talk) 03:58, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

That was just a tip for future editing. Also, I mentioned this on the talk page of the article, but if you are getting any compensation from LiveWorkPlay, you are required to disclose that you are a paid editor. In general any employee of a company editing the company's Wikipedia page is what we call a paid editor. I'll leave you disclosure info next.--- Possibly (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I did disclose it, right away, before I wrote a single word.. Thanks. Iamthekanadian (talk) 04:05, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021

Hello Iamthekanadian. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Iamthekanadian. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Iamthekanadian|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Template:Z159 --- Possibly (talk) 04:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I believed that I disclosed before I ever wrote a word. I remember seeing a little badge thing, and other people told me that I had done it. I am not getting a dime for this, but yes, I work for the organization, and never made a secret of it or intended to hide it. There had been an article for many years and I realized it had been deleted. I was told undeleted unlikely so better to create one. Iamthekanadian (talk) 04:08, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

you disclosed a conflict of interest on your user page. What you need to also say is that you are a paid editor. This is required. Do you want me to do it for you? --- Possibly (talk) 04:19, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I added the correct template for you. --- Possibly (talk) 04:20, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

OK, thanks, does this mean I am no longer doing anything wrong, or will I come back tomorrow to find another 10 messages about all the bad things I have done? I haven't had this much fun since my last cavity. But thanks for your help I do appreciate your time. Iamthekanadian (talk) 04:26, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

You are all good. You can edit the current draft, but if the article gets published you need to use the talk page to request edits. The paid editor disclosure is something you agreed to when you signed up. It's there to keep the encyclopedia neutral by clearly showing who has a special interest in an article. --- Possibly (talk) 04:40, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

It's just that I am not getting paid for this... it makes sense to me to declare that I work for the organization. I don't understand the insistence on the "paid editor." Iamthekanadian (talk) 04:43, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

I've read https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure and I don't agree that it applies. I am NOT being paid for anything at all to do with Wikipedia. Iamthekanadian (talk) 06:02, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

User:Iamthekanadian, I addressed you on the articles talk page.

User:Possibly, I think you're being a bit strict.

I don't have any use for commercial editing, at all. In fact, I hate it. However there are various levels.

To my mind, "paid editor" means either a professional PR man hired to work on a Wikipedia article, or else a paid employee told by his boss "your assignment today is to buff up our Wikipedia article" or something. Doing it on your own dime because you're a loyal employee (or fan) of the organization or just want to generally impress your boss, that is more "conflict of interest" editing rather than flat out paid editing. It's bad, but not the same level of bad.

It's not as bad as when BP hired a PR team to whitewash the article about that oil spill. (I believe they succeeded, these snakes are really good, clever, determined ($$$), and past masters at being ingratiating. The situation here is nothing like that. I mean the entity isn't even a for-profit organization, so it's not really "commercial" editing. Nobody's adding falsehoods, or cherry-picking facts, or spinning anything to any great degree, or trying to make bad things about the organization seem not so bad. If you'd like to ask User:Iamthekanadian to not edit the article directly but just suggest edits on the talk page, I'd be OK with that. In fact, User:Iamthekanadian, let's do it that way for the time being, OK? Herostratus (talk) 21:44, 30 May 2021 (UTC)

No problem Herostratus this is sort of what I was thinking all along. Like, the article had been deleted after a presence of many years with many editors. I asked if the article could go back up so I could help address the deficiencies. That was declined. OK, so recommended to start the article from scratch. But ideally this is not done by someone connected to the subject. But it's not going to happen any other way, is it? So I declare the conflict of interest, I do my best to build an objective article (any of the mistakes I made I would have been with any subject matter, because I am new, not because I am in love with the topic) and then I immediately ask for help with it, being transparent about how it all came about. So this is exactly what I was hoping for - without the admonishments and accusations - I would do my best to get it started and then there would be problems with it that would need fixing, and it might take time, but experienced people would help with that. So, I reiterate, I am not getting a dime from this, directly or indirectly, and I have read that paid editor policy many times, and to me it does not say that anyone who works for an organization is automatically designated a paid contributor. I am a volunteer on this, in every sense of the word, with a conflict of interest (as I identified) because (for example) if there was a scandal or something involved with the organization, one could see how that could impact one's objectivity - which is why I identified immediately a conflict of interest (but not a paid editor, because I ready the policy, and I still do not believe it applies). Iamthekanadian (talk) 17:49, 31 May 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: not to make a liar of myself, but I did some edits - totally objective tweaks to correct some errors and/or achieve clarity. I think the article is looking very encyclopedic and is tighter too, in a positive way. Iamthekanadian (talk) 03:01, 1 June 2021 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 2

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Lansdowne Park, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page CPL. Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 06:01, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

Regarding paid editing

Based on off-wiki evidence that I am not allowed to reveal publicly, though I will privately share it with other administrators upon request, I have reason to believe that you are not being honest with us about your relationship with your employer. The long and short of it is that you do unambigiously meet the definition of a paid editor, and I strongly advise you to be honest about this and fully disclose your relationship with your organization. 331dot (talk) 22:51, 2 June 2021 (UTC)

I am an open book - what is it you want to know? My previous statements are 100% accurate. My activity on Wikipedia will not in any way result in any payment to me, directly, or indirectly. Do you mean that because among other things I do as part of my job public communications for the organization? I do. But as I said, I am happy to provide a testimonial or whatever you like from my employer that I have not been asked to do anything with Wikipedia, they don't know anything about my contributions here for this article or any other, that my salary will not go up or down based on anything I do with Wikipedia, that my performance will not be evaluated one way or another based on what I do with Wikipedia. Would you like to have a Zoom call with my board and talk about it? Like most of us in the nonprofit world (unless they work for a big corporate charity of which this is not) we do all kinds of activities for which we are not paid because we care about our causes. I declared a conflict of interest and I am not hiding a thing. Have you seen the article? Do you really think this is a black hat operation? Have you looked into the organization - does it really look like the path to wealth via deceptive Wikipedia practices? I already have the conflict of interest label and paid contributor label so what is it you want, how far would you like me to bend the knee? You are engaging in off-wiki research over this? You might need to take a break. Iamthekanadian (talk) 23:12, 2 June 2021 (UTC)