Hello, TriJenn, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 ((help me))
before the question. Again, welcome!
Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Heather Lutze may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.
Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 11:51, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello! TriJenn,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 (talk) 14:21, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
|
You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.
Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!
DGG ( talk ) 04:09, 22 May 2015 (UTC)Your userpage says that "I sometimes make editing changes and create new pages on behalf of my current and past clients.", per WP:COI and WP:PAY, you must disclose the articles with which you have a COI. Per WP:COI, you are also strongly discouraged from directly editing pages, but are encouraged to suggest changes at the talkpage instead.
Now to your edits at Morgan James Publishing. First, are they one of your clients- if so, you must disclose it. Secondly, all your edits where completely unsourced, and therefore not acceptable per Wikipedia's verifiability policy. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:41, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm guessing that they are, since you're spamming other articles with the publisher name, again not providing any reliable sources. See your spam edits to Jay Conrad Levinson, Brendon Burchard, Joel Comm, and Eva Haller, just adding the publisher name to get them some free advertising. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:44, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Morgan James Publishing, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Also, please respond to the above message about your conflict of interest before making any further edits. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:45, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
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. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:52, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
Hi. I presume you had an edit conflict or some other glitch, but please could you restore the large amount of material you removed from DGG's talk page in this edit. Thank you. --Dweller (talk) 13:10, 10 September 2015 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Randy Gage is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Randy Gage until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John from Idegon (talk) 23:35, 5 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi TriJenn. I work on conflict of interest issues in Wikipedia, and try to help people understand how to do the right thing here.
You have disclosed that you edit Wikipedia on behalf of clients. Thanks for making that clear. Please be aware that per the WP:PAID policy, you need to disclose both your employer and the client, each time you come here to do that. This is not optional. It is also a pretty bad idea to do both paid editing and volunteer editing; it doesn't really look good when you circle back and edit an article for "as a volunteer" that you once edited for pay; it generates distrust. (more on that below)
But for starters, would you please update your Userpage, User:TriJenn, with the complete disclosures, including any clients you have not yet disclosed? That would be great.
There are two steps to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.
What we ask editors to do who have a COI (who are for example, like you, here on behalf of a client) and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:
By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies.
The latter is very important! There are a whole slew of policies and guidelines that govern content and behavior here in Wikipedia. Please see User:Jytdog/How for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything), and for an overview of the content and behavior policies and guidelines. Learning and following these is very important, and takes time.
Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. That sometimes means saying "no" to what clients want.
Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.
There is a "black market" out there of paid editors -- some of whom have been indefinitely banned but sneak back in; they do a lot of harm here and there is a lot of bad feeling in the community about paid editing and paid editors. For examples of bad things that have happened, please do read Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia (an actual article). You also should read the essay, WP:Wikipedia is in the real world.
There are also PR people who have said they want to do the right thing here - who try to understand the mission of WP and the the way we operate -- see Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms.
I hope that all makes sense to you.
Will you please agree to learn and follow the content and behavioral policies and guidelines, and to follow the peer review processes going forward when you want to work on any article where you are working on behalf of a client? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 04:52, 19 July 2017 (UTC)