I'm Viewmont Viking, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type ((helpme))
here on your talk page, and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
Remember to always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the VVikingTalkEdits 14:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC) button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~
at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to this (your talk) page, and a timestamp.
The best way to learn about something is to experience it. Explore, learn, contribute, and don't forget to have some fun!
((My sandbox))
on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.Sincerely, VVikingTalkEdits 14:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC) VVikingTalkEdits 14:09, 7 August 2018 (UTC) (Leave me a message)
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. In one of your recent edits, you added links to an article which did not add content or meaning, or repeated the same link several times throughout the article. Please see Wikipedia's guideline on links to avoid overlinking. Thank you. --VVikingTalkEdits 14:10, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Viewmont Viking - Initiative is indeed a major agency (this is documented ad nauseam) that is part of the Interpublic Group of Companies. We are currently creating a Wikipedia entry for the agency but as far as I understand that should not preclude it from being listed here. Can you please stop deleting it? Thank you.
Viewmont Viking - the links are not repetitive - each one goes to a different article verifying that Initiative does indeed work with the clients we say it does. It would be really helpful to understand why that's not accepted given how explicit guidelines are about documenting everything.
If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.
A tag has been placed on Draft:Initiative (media agency), requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. VVikingTalkEdits 14:19, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Why is this being deleted? The information included above is a straight description of what the agency does/is - in the format/vein of countless other companies on Wikipedia...this doesn't make sense.
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Interpublic. Thank you. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:18, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Interpublic Group of Companies. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Points to note:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. ☆ Bri (talk) 17:22, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Bri - I have been an editor on Wikipedia for roughly 24 hours - so there is no intent to editwar. My challenge here is plain: I am adding the name of an IPG agency on a list of IPG agencies. Why is this not an appropriate edit? Please explain and thank you.
Hello Berwitz. 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 Interpublic Group of Companies, and that 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:Berwitz. The template ((Paid)) can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: ((paid|user=Berwitz|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 21:29, 7 August 2018 (UTC)
Oh my Dear Lord I admit, since creating an account on Wikipedia, I have apparently and unknowingly broken more laws and regulations in one day than I have in the entirety of my life combined thus far. I am not compensated to create a Wikipedia page but I am employed by the company. I wasn't hiding that, I just didn't think it was relevant since I was posting objective, empirical, fully referenced information (not propaganda or sales material). Can you please direct me to someone who can help me? This is bordering on the farcical at this point. Thanks.
Hi Marge-Bev. I spend time working on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with my regular editing. I see you asked for some help above. I'd be happy to help you. I am, by the way, not an administrator, but an editor like you, just with more experience.
I've read through the page above and your contributions.
It is pretty clear that you work for IPG or perhaps its Initiative subsidiary.
So here is the deal...
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. Unmanaged conflicts of interest can also lead to people behaving in ways that violate our behavioral policies and cause disruption in the normal editing process. Managing conflict of interest well, also protects conflicted editors and their employers themselves - please see WP:Wikipedia is in the real world, and Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia for some guidance and stories about people and companies that have brought bad press upon themselves through unmanaged conflict of interest editing.
As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).
Would you please start the disclosure process by just replying here, and a) disclosing your employer, and b) briefly describing your role in the company (for example, you could be an office administrator, you could handle accounts, your job could be doing PR for the company, etc)?
We'll just take this one step at a time. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 01:29, 9 August 2018 (UTC)