User talk:Max zedtwitz

Welcome!

Hello, Max zedtwitz, 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:

The five pillars of 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)
Manual of Style

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! Joaquin008 ^(talk) 06:58, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Editing advice

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In the future, it is recommended that you use the preview button before you save; this helps you find any errors you have made, reduces edit conflicts, and prevents clogging up recent changes and the page history. Thank you. PhilKnight (talk) 14:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

May 2013

Hello, Max zedtwitz. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

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.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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 a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. 99.149.85.229 (talk) 15:12, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

Hello. 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. 99.149.85.229 (talk) 17:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Sure, let me know how I can help resolve this conflict. Best, MaxMax zedtwitz (talk) 02:37, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The suggestions above are helpful: in general, contributors are discouraged from writing about themselves or the entities with which they're associated, if only because neutrality of tone is easily compromised. The articles you've created about yourself and GLORAD contain text that's not supported by WP:RELIABLE sources; in other words, all content in a Wikipedia article must include references from objective sources that are not associated with the subjects, as opposed to WP:PRIMARY sources or the observations of first-hand experience. The guidelines at WP:GNG are helpful, too, for they underscore the necessity for significant coverage by multiple sources. Thanks, 99.149.85.229 (talk) 11:54, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! - This was indeed helpful. I've eliminated all forms of primary sources except those listed under "External Links". All other references are now independent sources from peer-reviewed academic journals and thus, hopefully, considered reliable. It would be possible to increase the number of references for each of those statements made but it would make the text read like an academic review paper -- not very user-friendly. Please let me know if I have been able to address the concern of objectivity, and if any other issues remain. Max zedtwitz (talk) 15:19, 28 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]