User talk:ElwoodNharvey

Hello, ElwoodNharvey, and

• 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! Praxidicae (talk) 15:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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. Praxidicae (talk) 15:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello ElwoodNharvey. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, 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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:ElwoodNharvey. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=ElwoodNharvey|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. Praxidicae (talk) 15:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes of course, Praxidicae. I will update the information as outlined as a paid contributor... and totally read the necessary documentation. Sorry, that it wasn't clear to me the process in writing articles outlined anywhere that I could see. The intention of the article is not meant to be paid promotional as it is informational, please advise on any verbiage you find is not so as you see fit.. or direct me to the needed instructional pages, thanks.

Hi Praxidicae, I've update my userpage as such.. hopefully it meets the requirements. I found your direction quite a bit clearer than the wikipedia form.. but I think I did it right. Although I'm being paid to update said clients Wikipedia page they have been advised since I'm an unbiased individual in their page that all materiel's are subject to Wikipedia's notability guidelines. I have reviewed said notability guidelines with the client to my satisfaction and as far as I can tell they do meet those conditions. Furthermore I have required if not readily attainable, links to information in material provided and advised them that other Wikipedia editors may ask for further evidence of such information and notability requirements. After reviewing recent editors linked Wikipedia pages it is now clear that the process for submission that I should have initiated was through the "Create article" page and then it would have been in draft form until approved. Furthermore it looks like updates to Matthew J. Evans pages are also to be submitted differently as well. My thanks to Praxidicae for pointing me in the right direction although having been in web development for years and also understanding the immensity of these kind of projects without the adequate people means that the process can get muddied to somebody just trying to do due diligence. Please advise on how you would like me to proceed from here, thanks.

By the way,  of course I prefer that I not have to start from the very beginning in article submission now. I realize it may in fact be best if it currently does not fully comply with all guidelines to be put into a draft form. I would like specifics either way on how things should be constructed to fully comply.  In the case of Matthew J. Evans I can certainly use the submission process rather than the direct edit faculty.  My conclusions on why his article was in question beyond that he had a COI given that he himself was putting it together looked to be a matter of "having a certain following."  I advised Matthew J. Evans and his Mother Leona Evans that he maybe more fitting for the "notability" qualifications by his work as a young film maker and awards, more than his supporting roles in various productions and a couple of awards - hence why I updated the article in the way i did.