User talk:JCI2020

Welcome!

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia

Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
No edit warring or sock puppetry.
If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to do so.
Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject. Deliberately adding such content or otherwise editing articles maliciously is considered vandalism; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~ (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:03, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

COI Edits.

I have reverted your edits, due to your admission of COI. I suggest that if you have requests regarding edits, you make those requests on the article talk page. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 08:53, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Spacecowboy420 (talk) 09:22, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello JCI2020, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Talk:Global Innovation Index has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college-level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:16, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! I see that you have, very properly, declared your paid connection to the Global Innovation Index; thank you for doing that! However, that does not allow you to copy-paste content from its publications here. Under our copyright policy such material has to be released under a free licence before it can be used here – please see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. This is as much for the protection of the copyright owner as anything else. The 2013 report is clearly marked "© Cornell University, INSEAD, and WIPO 2013". You will I'm sure understand that we can't know whether you are authorised by those three institutions to re-use their content, and that we can't simply accept your word for your status there. I should perhaps also point out that, while content can be released through the donation process I've linked to, there is absolutely no guarantee that it will be thought suitable for inclusion in the article. Regards, Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:31, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Understood, and much appreciated. Can the page then be reverted to how it stood March 2 before my information updates, and any future edits will be done in the proper paraphrase & copyright manner JCI2020 (talk) 16:42, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

No it cannot be reverted, because:

Every version of this article appears to have some level of copyright violation, therefore it needs proper admin attention, so only that which is not a copyvio can be kept. Wikipedia has no deadline, even if the copyvio tag makes your company look bad.
You cannot make demands of Wikipedia to revert to content that is questionable, this shows signs of attempts at article ownership, which is not permitted.
Adding copyright violations to Talk:Global Innovation Index after having been warned for copyvio at Global Innovation Index indicates you're not listening to advice, and also don't mind wasting admin's time, as they have to revision delete it.
Your editing pattern is suspiciously similar to that of other promotional editors on Global Innovation Index, who have been blocked for sockpuppetry. I'm therefore very suspicious that you're a sockpuppet, and if so all your edits should be reverted immediately. Apparently not a sock
Even if 4 is false, 1-3 give a strong impression that you're not here to contribute positively. Joseph2302 (talk) 19:00, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

JCI2020, I should have made clear that my comments above starting "Hi! I see that you have …" referred only to your edit to Talk:Global Innovation Index. I have not actually checked whether any of your additions to the article itself contained any similar problems. My reasons for blanking the page had nothing to do with you, but related to two separate copyright infringements, one in the very first version of the article and another on 26 January 2015. Because, as Joseph2302 has said, every version of the page contains copyvio, there is no "clean" version in can be rolled back to. It needs to be rewritten from scratch. Unfortunately the copyright problems board is badly backed up, so it may be a while before that happens. There is, I'm afraid, little you can usefully do in the interim; however, if you are aware of independent reliable sources (i.e., unconnected in any way with your company or its products) which discuss the index, it might be helpful if you would like to list them on the article talk page. Once the copyright problem has been sorted out, you will be able to request edits on the talk page; you will need to take care not to over-tax the patience and goodwill of volunteer editors. The rankings will not in any case be restored to the article, as they are based on your complex in-house calculations, not on publicly available data, and so are subject to copyright – please see WP:CIL for analysis and explanation. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 00:02, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Massyparcer, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Joseph2302 (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Confirming here that the sockpuppet investigation has been processed and this is not a sock; my input is intended to be reliable, neutral, and non-promotional JCI2020 (talk) 15:14, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, feel free to remove this. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:59, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio

Understood, thank you. There were no intentions of copyvio, and rather just attempts to contribute up-to-date information. What would be the best approach to contribute neutral, accurate, paraphrased, non-promotional information to this page moving forward? JCI2020 (talk) 20:36, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Contribute to the talk page of the article in question. Make requests for edits, showing why those proposed edits are notable, neutral and supported by reliable, non-primary sources. Then sit back and let other editors consider those requests based on their merits. 06:11, 8 March 2016 (UTC)Spacecowboy420 (talk)

Thank you for this input. I have suggested an introductory overview in the talk page to provide accurate, neutral information, supported by reliable, non-primary sources.JCI2020 (talk) 15:38, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]