Shaymius10

December 2016

Hello, I'm IagoQnsi. I noticed that you recently removed some content from University of Western Ontario without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. The information about the university's ranking was well-sourced, but you removed it and replaced it with a non-neutral statement. IagoQnsi (talk) 03:45, 13 December 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hello Shaymius10. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. 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.
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:Shaymius10. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Shaymius10|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 compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Jytdog (talk) 20:46, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

pasted content here, that was left at my talk page in this diff. Jytdog (talk) 21:00, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog,

I am a new Wikipedia user and it seems like I was unaware of the full disclosure I had to make in accordance to Wikipedia's policies.

You mentioned that I should include this .

Can you instruct me on where I should place this disclosure on the page? (e.g. Top of the page, bottom, etc) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaymius10 (talk • contribs) 20:54, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

{{paid}} goes on your user page/ user talk page. (See the link for instructions.) {{Connected contributor (paid)}} should be added to the talk page of any article you edit for pay. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:05, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for replying! before we move to the tag would you please just describe the nature of your paid relationships? The profile of your contributions matches a freelancer or someone who works for a PR/marketing firm. I'm asking so that we can get the full disclosure done efficiently - it will take just a few back and forths. Thanks again for replying! Jytdog (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi, not a problem and thank you for guiding through the process. I am actually an employee of the firm (non-marketing) and wanted to accurately reflect the number of offices (went from 16 to 10) and the affiliation to BDA Partners (previously named Business Development Asia). Right now, our page is looking very very dull and I was hoping to revert back to everything.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaymius10 (talk • contribs) 21:21, 18 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog - would be happy to provide information but would it be possible to message you privately somewhere? Not so sure making sensitive information public on wikipedia talk page is a good idea. Alternatively, would it be possible for me to delete certain information upon providing them to you on the talk page?

If you go to my talk page, in the left menu you will see "email this user" and you can send me an email that way. Please be aware that i am not asking you to reveal any personal information, just connections. but if you want to email me i can help you figure out how to disclose any COI you might have. you are under no obligation whatsoever to disclose anything private to me. I am sorry to belabor that but we take people's privacy very seriously. and i also should say that you can email arbcom to get guidance if you wish. They actually are under obligation to keep information confidential. (i am not. I will keep it confidential, but i am not under formal obligation to). Sorry if that all seems heavy handed but again we all take people's privacy very seriously. Jytdog (talk) 03:41, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Typically, if I'm bored and I was browsing through pages and I felt like I could update the page, I tend to try updating them myself.

That said, can you give me the next steps on how someone may be able to write an article for WB? If I were to provide you with the necessary information, or since I now have the disclosure, am I able to try writing the article again?

OK, that is not very believable, but whatever. For now we will leave it at you being an employee of William Blair & Company. Please see below....Jytdog (talk) 06:29, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

So thanks disclosing your relationship with the investment bank. So you have a COI for that company and related topics, as we define that in Wikipedia.

To finish the disclosure piece, would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:Shaymius10 - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple like: "I work for William Blair & Company and have a conflict of interest with regard to that company and related topics" would be fine. If you want to add anything else there that is relevant to what you want to do in WP feel free to add it, but please don't add anything promotional about the company or yourself (see WP:USERPAGE for guidance if you like).

Another editor has added a tag to article's talk page (Talk:William Blair & Company), so the disclosure is done there. Once you disclose on your user page, the disclosure piece of this will be done.

There are two pieces 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 and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. You can make the edit request easily - and provide notice to the community of your request - by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at Talk:William Blair & Company - there is a link at "request corrections or suggest content" in that section -- if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request. You can also add a {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review.

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. (There are good faith paid editors here, who have signed and follow the Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms, and there are "black hat" paid editors here who lie about what they do and really harm Wikipedia).

But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, 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. 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.

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

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 the William Blair & Company article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. Best regards Jytdog (talk) 06:36, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Jytdog - I think that it's very fair and I would be happy to abide by process. Measures such as the peer review process is what keeps contents in Wikipedia non-biased and accurate and I believe in the missions/visions of Wikipedians. I will update the full disclosure on my page, and ask for review upon updating the William Blair page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shaymius10 (talk • contribs) 21:00, 19 August 2017 (UTC)

Please be sure to sign your posts. Also, the process is to post proposals on the Talk page so they are reviewed before they go live. Not edit the article and then ask for peer review. Hope that makes sense. Jytdog (talk) 01:32, 20 August 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of DECA Ontario for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article DECA Ontario 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/DECA Ontario until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, 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. —C.Fred (talk) 04:18, 14 November 2018 (UTC)