User talk:Bob Stamegna

Welcome!

Hello, Bob Stamegna, 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:

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! -- The Red Pen of Doom 07:24, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Potential conflict of interest[edit]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Global Cool (per this edit, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should 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;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. -- The Red Pen of Doom 07:27, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I was unaware that editing our own information was not in keeping with the wikipedia protocols. It is just that the information which is being reverted to is out of date and no longer relevant to our campaigns. Hence the changes were initiated by us as no one else was doing so. What do you advise?Bob Stamegna (talk) 07:40, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Content in Wikipedia articles has to be verifiable by a reliable source and presented in a neutral point of view. Using the article's talk page to suggest changes and linking to sources to verify the changes is the suggested protocol. -- The Red Pen of Doom 07:59, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Mr. Stamegna. I was just coming over here to say what Red Pen already did. One thing I'd like to add -- "no longer applies to our charity" doesn't mean that it no longer should be in the encyclopedia article - it may be something that should stay in for historical reasons. For example, we recently had someone claiming to be the copyeditor for the International Order of the Rainbow for Girls' website deleting cited information about the early history of the organization and replacing it with promotional fluff from the website.

If you had referenced your edits properly to independent sources, then even though they had come from an account that clearly violated our username rules, I probably wouldn't have blinked twice -- just warned you about the username policy and let the edits stand. One other thing; suggesting changes on the talk page first is strongly recommended, but not mandatory. Once you get the hang of what we will and won't argue about, you should be able to make your changes directly. --SarekOfVulcan (talk) 11:46, 22 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]