User talk:Brad Gottemoeller

Welcome!

Hello, Brad Gottemoeller, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Draft:Continental Express Inc, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome!   — Jeff G. ツ 12:39, 14 June 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Continental Express Inc (June 17)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by RoySmith were:  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:Continental Express Inc 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:Continental Express Inc, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" 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, 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.

-- RoySmith (talk) 13:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, Brad Gottemoeller! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation 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! -- RoySmith (talk) 13:49, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Continental Express Inc

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 Draft:Continental Express Inc, 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. -- RoySmith (talk) 14:02, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Undisclosed paid editing

Hello Brad Gottemoeller. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Draft:Continental Express Inc, 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Brad Gottemoeller. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Brad Gottemoeller|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. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:25, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm Deb. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
Hello, Brad Gottemoeller. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• 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 must 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 WP:PAID).

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.Deb (talk) 15:12, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Maybe it wasn't a sensible step to use the name of an employee of the company by which you say you are not being paid as your user name. I suggest you re-read the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest guidelines before attempting to create any further articles. Deb (talk) 15:37, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Please cite where it says 'Brad Gottemoeller' is an employee of Continental Express, Inc. You base your arguments off of assumptions, not facts. I want to work with you in this process of getting my article published, not against. Brad Gottemoeller (talk) 15:59, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

You are being extremely evasive. I notice that you haven't said you have no connection with the company you are writing about. I also notice that you haven't tried to create articles about anything else except that company. You must have realised that calling your account by the surname of the company's executives would arouse suspicion, so what possessed you to use that name? What you call "my" article is not your article - there is no such thing on Wikipedia; it is an article and it was a poorly-written one that gave every indication of having been created purely for promotional purposes. If you've done what I advised and read the COI guidelines, you should be able to understand what the problem is. If you want to work constructively on this project, I suggest you look for improvements you could make to existing articles instead of trying to create a completely new one. Deb (talk) 16:08, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Whether I have a connection with the company I am writing about or not does not change the fact that my article was not written for promotional use nor is any of the wording in the article biased or promoting any part of the company. As I mentioned before I am new to the wikipedia universe and just because I am new and not apart or your inner 'clique' of accredited editors does not mean that I cannot write an informative non-biased article on a company. I do not have the time to make countless edits or improvements on articles. If my article was so 'poorly-written' how could I have made the article better? You seen to love to lash out at how bad the article is I wrote, and how it promotes Continental Express, Inc. but fail to yield any physical or specific proof as to how it is promotional or 'poorly-written'. As I said I dont spend my time all day writing articles, but that shouldnt inhibit me of creating an article. Please show me how I can change the wording in the article and I will do whatever is possible. If the problem is that I have the same surname as the company's executive, I will gladly go through the necessary actions to get passed this COI issue. Just because I may or may not have a COI does not mean that I cannot write an article about a topic and not have it be promotional. I guarantee most articles on Wikipedia started with someone who had an interest in the topic on hand and just didnt wake up one morning and think "I am going to write a wikipedia page for McDonalds this morning". Brad Gottemoeller (talk) 17:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

All you've done here is reveal your ignorance of this project and its guidelines. "Just because I may or may not have a COI does not mean that I cannot write an article about a topic and not have it be promotional." Actually, yes it does. Someone with a COI who is clever enough could theoretically write an article about a topic in non-promotional wording and not be found out. That's evidently not you. You say "I do not have the time to make countless edits or improvements on articles." You have a total of 13 edits since you arrived, which suggests a very low level of commitment, so maybe this isn't the place for you. We can't use volunteers who are here purely to create one article about a topic that doesn't meet the notability criteria for inclusion. Deb (talk) 17:40, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

Once again all you are doing is basing your argument off of assumptions and 'could' this and 'could' that. Considering I just arrived within the last week, I am averaging 2 edits per day. How many other editors out there are non existent anymore or average on more than 2 edits a day? All you do is claim this, assume that, and have still yet to provide any physical or specific proof as to how the article i wrote was promotional or non-neutral in any which way. Also no where in the COI guidelines does it state that the article can still not be published. The guidelines just avoid against it. Once again, your argument is based of your own opinion not facts. As I have stated before, I want to work with you to publish this informative non-biased article about Continental Express, Inc., not against. Please let me know when you are willing to do this. I will gladly do whatever is necessary. Brad Gottemoeller (talk) 17:54, 17 June 2019 (UTC)

In addition to your claims having no merit and are all opinion based, please read this article on wikipedia Criticism of Wikipedia. Specifically this segment right here 'Wikipedia is sometimes characterized as having a hostile editing environment. In Common Knowledge?: An Ethnography of Wikipedia (2014), Dariusz Jemielniak, a steward for Wikimedia Foundation projects, stated that the complexity of the rules and laws governing editorial content and the behavior of the editors is a burden for new editors and a licence for the "office politics" of disruptive editors.[6][7] In a follow-up article, Jemielniak said that abridging and rewriting the editorial rules and laws of Wikipedia for clarity of purpose and simplicity of application would resolve the bureaucratic bottleneck of too many rules.[7] In The Rise and Decline of an Open Collaboration System: How Wikipedia's Reaction to Popularity is Causing its Decline (2013), Aaron Halfaker stated that the over-complicated rules and laws of Wikipedia unintentionally provoked the decline in editorial participation that began in 2009—frightening away new editors who otherwise would contribute to Wikipedia.[8]' Just a thought you might want to ponder through your head. Once again please let me know when you are ready to work with me on publishing the article I wrote. I admit I am not perfect and am new to this, but I am willing to work with whomever to publish the informative non-biased factual article about Continental Express Inc. The question is now, are you? Brad Gottemoeller (talk) 18:23, 17 June 2019 (UTC)