You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Thank you for your edit to the disambiguation page Inclusion. However, please note that disambiguation pages are not articles; rather, they are meant to help readers find a specific article quickly and easily. From the disambiguation dos and don'ts, you should:
Only list articles that readers might reasonably be looking for
Use short sentence fragment descriptions, with no punctuation at the end
Use exactly one navigable link ("blue link") in each entry
Only add a "red link" if used in existing articles, and include a "blue link" to an appropriate article
Do not pipe links (unless style requires it) – keep the full title of the article visible
I noticed your recent edit to Inclusion does not have an edit summary. Please be sure to provide a summary of every edit you make, even if you write only the briefest of summaries. The summaries are very helpful to people browsing an article's history.
Please use the edit summary to explain your reasoning for the edit, or a summary of what the edit changes. You can give yourself a reminder to add an edit summary by setting Preferences → Editing → Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks! Widefox; talk 12:13, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, Junopolo. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Inclusion, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:
avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate 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).
Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.
Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Your account is an WP:SPA, which is edit warring to include a topic. Do you have any connection with the subject (in any way), or any communication with any such party, or been paid or receive any benefit from such an article. You must disclose any connection - see WP:COI. This is also for User:Junopolo/sandboxWidefox; talk 12:16, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at Inclusion. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.
If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. Widefox; talk 12:18, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on User:Junopolo/sandbox, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may be soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
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 removed 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, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Widefox; talk 12:27, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You are clearly here to promote this organization. You have not complied with mandatory paid editing disclosure. In addition to Widefox's note above, the page was also blatant copyright infringement. None of these things are good, but copyright violations are in another class. Any further infringement will subject you to an immediate and indefinite block. Meanwhile, provide the required disclosure. It's actually not difficult. The template I am posting below provides instructions.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Junopolo. Your edits look as if you are being paid. Paid promotion is an especially egregious type of conflict of interest (COI). Paid articles should be submitted through the articles for creation process. If you are receiving or expect to receive money for your edits, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post the disclosure on your user page at User:Junopolo. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Junopolo|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. If you are being paid, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your edit to the disambiguation page Inclusion. However, please note that disambiguation pages are not articles; rather, they are meant to help readers find a specific article quickly and easily. From the disambiguation dos and don'ts, you should:
Hello. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia.
Prompt me when entering a blank edit summary.
Thanks! Widefox; talk 12:13, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add soapboxing, promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at User:Junopolo/sandbox, you may be blocked from editing. Widefox; talk 12:21, 17 September 2017 (UTC)
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Widefox; talk 22:27, 18 September 2017 (UTC)