User talk:Quinnmosier
Quinnmosier, you are invited to the Teahouse![edit]
|
Hi Quinnmosier! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC) |
March 2020[edit]
Hello Quinnmosier. 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 Andreas J. Köstenberger, 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:Quinnmosier. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Quinnmosier|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. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 18:17, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Response to Coffee Hello Coffee, I am not being compensated directly or indirectly for my edits. Quinnmosier (talk) 00:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- What then, may I ask, caused you to edit the article in such a promotional manner? And, why is this the only article/topic you have edited? — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 17:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- I noticed that many pages of prominent biblical scholars and theologians were in bad shape. So, starting with Köstenberger, I plan to better the pages of various biblical scholars and theologians with more accurate and reliable information. It would be helpful for discussions moving forward if you approached matters without undue skepticism. Thanks. Quinnmosier (talk) 23:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
- My apologies then. I would ask though, going forward, that you please veer away from editorializing in articles or adding peacock terms. Have you looked over WP:RS, WP:V, and WP:BLP yet? I recommend reading those and other key policies to make sure you know how to improve the articles and keep to encyclopedic standards. I'll drop a welcome message with such helpful links shortly. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 00:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)
Hello, I'm Coffee. 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. — Coffee // have a ☕️ // beans // 18:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove Articles for deletion notices or comments from articles and Articles for deletion pages, as you did at Andreas J. Köstenberger, you may be blocked from editing. Praxidicae (talk) 00:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)
Welcome[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.
If you have any questions, feel free to ask at the Teahouse.
Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...
Finding your way around:
|
Need help?
|
|
How you can help:
|
|
Additional tips...
|
ArbCom 2020 Elections voter message[edit]
 | Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add |
3rr[edit]
Your recent editing history at Andreas J. Köstenberger shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:14, 6 February 2023 (UTC)
February 2023[edit]
Please stop adding unreferenced or poorly referenced biographical content, especially if controversial, to articles or any other Wikipedia page, as you did at Andreas J. Köstenberger. Content of this nature could be regarded as defamatory and is in violation of Wikipedia policy. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Horse Eye's Back (talk) 17:15, 6 February 2023 (UTC)