Article MIT Sloan Management Review
- Spam sock accounts
This is the only warning you will receive. Your recent insertion of spam, commercial content, and/or links is prohibited under policy. Any further spamming may result in your account and/or your IP address being blocked from editing Wikipedia.
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. You are, however, encouraged to add appropriate content to the encyclopedia. If you feel the material in question should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you.
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 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,
- linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
- and you must always:
- avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you. --Hu12 17:45, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
Here is how to post correctly
Hi Debgall. It seems that you want to give publicity to MIT Sloan Management Review through Wikipedia. However, you are going about it the wrong way. For example, you posted a link to an article written by Clayton M. Christensen in the Clayton M. Christensen article and you posted a link to an article written by Peter Senge in the Peter Senge article. These MIT Sloan Management Review articles are useless in the Wikipedia articles by their authors. Wikipedia articles are to only use reliable source material that is independent of the topic. The key word is independent. To save yourself from COI, think of it this way, nothing Clayton M. Christensen himself writes is useful in the article on Clayton M. Christensen and nothing Peter Senge himself writes is useful in the Peter Senge article. This may seem backwards to you, but that is one reason why Wikipedia is so successful. The MIT Sloan Management Review articles are valuable in the topic they address. For example, the Peter Senge article Senge's seminal "The Leader's New Work" is valuable in Wikipedia's article(s) related to the topic of The Leader's New Work. Clayton M. Christensen's article * Christensen's "Finding the Right Job for your Product" is valuable in whatever Wikipedia article deals with Finding the Right Job for your Product. -- Jreferee (Talk) 03:06, 3 August 2007 (UTC)