Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Medi-Cal, may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows:
- A bare URL error. References show this error when one of the URL-containing parameters cannot be paired with an associated title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. (Fix | Ask for help)
Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)
Mandatory paid editing disclosure
edit
Hello Ctbw54. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Maximus Inc., 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
Paid advocates are 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 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:Ctbw54. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ctbw54|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. ~Anachronist (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- I have been noticing that Wikipedia is full of small, non-impactful edits to pages and I really wanted to tackle a large project. I have no conflict of interest, but given my theory, it makes sense that you would think this. I'm working to progress several pages and this one seems to have quite a bit of outdated and confusing information.
- Aside from that question, I saw that my edit was reverted due to the use of an SEC document as a citation. I appreciate the clarification on the rules of primary sourcing. I will revise the edit with different supporting citations. Thank you. Ctbw54 (talk) 20:25, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
August 2024
edit
As previously advised, your edits, such as the edit you made to Maximus Inc., give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Ctbw54, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Ctbw54|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Jdcomix (talk) 13:43, 16 August 2024 (UTC)
- This page is very outdated. I replaced sources from 2010 that no longer exist with current articles that support the information. I am not sure why this would indicated a COI. (I don't have one) Aren't we all just trying to make Wikipedia better? I would like to continue working on this (and other pages) so that the content presented more closely matches the available public information. It would be a shame to allow misinformation to remain. If there are specific editing/formatting/language mistakes I am making, I would be open to recommendations for how i can make those better. I see you are in school for Meteorology (which is super cool) and work on vandalism. I'm not vandalizing. Thank you. Ctbw54 (talk) 17:38, 6 September 2024 (UTC)