BkFan71

Welcome!

Hello, CSLiteraryAgency, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Wendy Meddour, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Cahk (talk) 17:34, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Wendy Meddour

The article Wendy Meddour has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Cahk (talk) 17:34, 15 September 2015 (UTC)

Use of Wikipedia for promotional purposes

Hello, CSLiteraryAgency. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
• instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or 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, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you. Regards, HaeB (talk) 15:04, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Paid editing disclosure

Hello CSLiteraryAgency. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, and specifically, your statement at the Teahouse (note also that your username violates the username policy and needs to be changed). 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. 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.

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, 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:BkFan71. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose. 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 compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:12, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Blocked

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. Please read the following carefully.

Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.

Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

Probably not, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again.

What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions here about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:

• Add the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} on your user talk page.
• Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
• Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
  • Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
  • Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

DES ^(talk) 15:13, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

Unblock

{{unblock-spamun|FTrew|I think there has been a misunderstanding - I am simply trying to create a wikipedia page for an award winning children's author. I am not being paid to do so. I have been constantly comparing my page to that of Lauren Child's, amongst others and there don't seem to be any violations and if there are I do not understand. I have also remained factual and have not to use any promotional language or positive or negative reviews of her books so that I remain neutral. Furthermore there is more editing to be done so you are not looking at the final product. Please unblock the account}}

Hello. Although the block notice above regards other matters of seeming promotion (and it is a template after all, so it's one-size-fits-all and may have unfocused or even irrelevant material for specific circumstances where it is placed [you have to understand the sheer volume we are dealing with – a tailored message, after a careful look, is the ideal of course, but it's just not feasible]), your account was blocked (not by me) based most directly on your username. The username policy, at its subsection at the shortcut WP:ORGNAME, provides:

"The following types of usernames are not permitted because they are considered promotional:  • "Usernames that unambiguously represent the name of a company, group, institution or product..."

As to your response to me: so what you're saying is that even though you've stated (at the Teahouse) that the page you created is for an "author I represent", you are not and will not be charging the client to create this page, and were not tasked to do so as part of your employment? I understand that can be the case and am just seeking clarification. Meanwhile, please follow the instructions to change your username, which is a clear problem. I do agree that the page you are in the midst of writing is much less promotional than many we see. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:23, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

I am the admin who placed the block, primarily in response to your username, plus the Teahouse statement mentioned by Fuhghettaboutit above. Note that you do not need to be paid specifically for editing Wikipedia as a contractor for us to consider an activity as paid editing. Anyone who is assigned or expected, as part of his of her employment, to create or edit Wikipedia pages is considered to be a paid editor. Paid editors are allowed, but the must clearly and fully disclose their affiliations in the matter, as is mentioned above on this page. Moreover, anyone editing a page about a subject which s/he has financial or personal ties to, in whatever form, has a [[WP:COI}Conflict of interest]], and should only edit with care, if at all. COI editors can place suggestions on the article talk page along with {{request edit}} to ask unconflicted editors to review them. In any case, no one may have a username which is that of an actual business, because that is considered both misleading and promotional. Moreover, usernames which appear to be that of or represent a business are strongly discouraged. The combination of the inappropriate username with the apparent COI editing which caused me to block. A clear statement on the existence of any COI you have (and A willingness to penly declare it as needed) and a statement of willingness to change your username would be helpful in obtaining an unblock. DES ^(talk) 23:08, 16 September 2015 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

BkFan71 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Requested username:

FTrew (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Dear DESiegel,

I would like to request that you unblock our account.

First, I would like to assure you that as a new user we did not deliberately flout Wikipedia rules. However, I can see that our username could suggest a conflict of interests and I am more than willing to change it. Would FTrew be suitable or something more anonymous?

Also I admit that whilst I personally do not have a financial or personal connection to the author, the agency I am completing work experience at does, so I understand why our account has been flagged up under the COI rules.

However, I am a little confused by these rules – please could you tell me who normally starts these pages? I know that many authors and celebrities have wiki pages, and I would have thought that they are started either by themselves or a member of their agency/PR teams, even if they don’t use such an obvious username? But perhaps not, and I get that rules are rules so we can change our username.

As I mentioned, this author’s is the first Wikipedia page that the agency has attempted to create (evidently not very well!). But I know it is something they would like to do more of. Some of their authors already have Stub pages (I do not know how these are created but can see they’re quite basic) and it would be great to expand on these pages. And as some of these authors are not very au fait with technology (even more so than us!) they would need some help expanding on the information – i.e .it would be best if the agency did it for them.

If you kindly agree to unblock this account or let us carry on if we change the username, I will of course be much more careful in ensuring that it is purely factual information with neutral wording. I think either yourself or a member of the Wikipedia team has already said that the page is not too bad on this front, and on reflection I can see some examples where I was a little too heavy handed on the adjectives! I will be careful to make sure it is better as I go along, but I will also do lots of editing (and ask someone to double check it) once I’ve finished typing it all, so forgive me if there are initially an adjective or two too many! To show I know what you mean by overly promotional language, I would change the sentence “At present Meddour is working on a magical new adventure series called The Secret Railway) to simply “Meddour is currently working on a new adventure series called The Secret Railway”. Would this be allowed if I cited an article or something similar about the book, or regardless of adjective, is this something you would only know if you worked with Wendy Meddour and therefore would we need to skip this until the book has been published? Knowing this will help us to make sure the rest of the page is following the Wiki rules.

Thanks for your help with this and I am happy to make any changes you suggest.

We would like to request a change of username please – and can this be FTrew? Or would it need to be even less specific, e.g. ft71cs?

Many thanks,

CSLiteraryAgency (talk) 7:09 am, Today (UTC−4)

Accept reason:

Allowing username change to requested username. Please put this request in at Wikipedia:Changing username as soon as possible to avoid re-blocking. DES ^(talk) 15:45, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Note: if you are unblocked and your user name is change to something acceptable, your account may only be used by one individual. User accounts are personal and must not be shared. So, who are the "we" you keep talking about?--ukexpat (talk) 13:09, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Only I will be using the account. As mentioned above I am completing work experience for a company that I realise now has Conflict of Interest with the subject matter of my page - I have also stated above that, if unblocked, I will declare said COI. I want to reiterate that only I have access to this account and only I will use it for editing.

About COI and Artist articles

To be clear, if an agency is paid by an artist, then any employee, contractor or affiliate who is assigned or expected to edited a Wikipedia article about that artist, or who expects such editing to be considered positively by the agency as part of his or her evaluation or work reputation is considered to be performing paid editing. So is an unpaid intern who is assigned or expected to do such editing and expects or hopes his or her overall performance at the agency to influence future work opportunities.

Most articles on artists are started by fans, and perfected by people who are interested in the quality of Wikipedia's coverage of a given subject area, possibly being fans of a type of music or art, but not always of a particular artist. Recently more such articles are being created by PR firms of various sorts, but those articles generally wind up deleted fairly promptly for promotionalism, lack of notability or both.

Please go through the change of username process promptly, before doing anything else. Please place a disclosure of your COI on your new user page once the change goes through, unless you never plan to edit any of the articles about artists represented by CSLA again. {{paid}} can be sued for this purpose, but you don't have to use that. DES ^(talk) 15:58, 17 September 2015 (UTC)

Advice

I am trying to make sure my page does not appear promotional by describing the author's books as simply as possible and just stating facts about her life and work. Any advice would be appreciated. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BkFan71 (talk • contribs) 07:41, 18 September 2015‎

Please read and abide by our neutral point of view policy. Make sure not to insert opinions or value judgements unless they are quotes or paraphrases of the statements of named individuals or entities, and that all such statements are supported by an inline citation to a source that verifies that the named person stated the opnion. This includes adjectives such as "important" "famous" "influential" and the like. Facts should generally also be cites to reliable sources. If there are differences of opinion among reliable sources, this should be mentioned. However a false or mechanical attempt at "balance" should not give undue weight to minority, much less fringe, points of view. I hope that helps. Feel free to ask about any particular issue on an article talk page, or at the Teahouse or the Help desk. DES ^(talk) 17:06, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Coi

copied from talk page of former username, User talk:CSLiteraryAgency‎‎ DES ^(talk) 16:57, 19 September 2015 (UTC)

Since the artist is not paying the literary agency and the literary agency is not paying the artist, I feel using {{paid}} is misleading. Would it be sufficient to use {{connected contributor}} ? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BkFan71 (talk • contribs) 17:43, 17 September 2015

While I don't know the details in this case, the usual business model is that the agency takes a commission on sales by the artist. If that is so, then for our purposes the agency is being paid by the artist. Whether they are specifically paid to create a Wikipedia page is irrelevant, if they are being paid for representation, and want to create the page as part of that representation, that is paid editing. DES ^(talk) 16:52, 19 September 2015 (UTC)