Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Tallsoutherngal36. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article WeGoLook, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia'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.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Logical Cowboy (talk) 03:44, 4 February 2015 (UTC)
Orphaned non-free image File:WeGoLook Logo.png
Thanks for uploading File:WeGoLook Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 04:11, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
March 2017
Hello, I'm EricEnfermero. I noticed that you made a change to an article, WeGoLook, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so! If you need guidance on referencing, please see the referencing for beginners tutorial, or if you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Note that we generally minimize the amount of non-independently sourced material, such as that written by company executives. EricEnfermero (Talk) 22:17, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Please do not add or change content, as you did at WeGoLook, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Again, we want to support article content with independent reliable sources, not those written by company leaders like Robin Smith. EricEnfermero (Talk) 22:55, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Kleuske (talk) 08:34, 14 April 2017 (UTC)
ANI
You have been reported on ANI Here — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1017:B002:16FB:4ECB:2A49:85CD:2F31 (talk) 22:01, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
April 2017
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}
. Huon (talk) 22:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC)- If this was you, you will also need to address that: Wikipedia does not allow people who engage in legal threats to edit the encyclopedia. Huon (talk) 22:11, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
Tallsoutherngal36 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
The user we reached out to was maliciously deleting the content from our page and our registered trademarks. I'm the CEO of WeGoLook and we were trying to update our page with our current information. 20 hours of work was deleted by the user and things were changed that were sourced.
Decline reason:
I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that
- the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
- the block is no longer necessary because you
- understand what you have been blocked for,
- will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
- will make useful contributions instead.
Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. [stwalkerster|talk] 21:57, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.