Welcome!
editHi Larnaux! I noticed your contributions to Ángel Di María and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.
As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:
Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.
If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:
If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.
Happy editing! Mattythewhite (talk) 23:38, 23 August 2020 (UTC)
August 2023
edit
Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. [1] MrOllie (talk) 18:06, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
Hello Larnaux. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
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:Larnaux. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Larnaux|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. DMacks (talk) 19:27, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- I do not receive any form of compensation for my edits. I am simply trying to make Wikipedia, in my field of expertise, a better and more relevant place. Best, Larnaux (talk) 19:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Let's be more specific: Are you an employee of Lara Media, publishers of thevou.com? MrOllie (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I am part of LARA Media Group, and I assume you can see my edits through the lens of "indirect compensation." In reality, we had endless internal problems with our writers covering subjects according to Wikipedia's content, terminology, and definitions to the point we employed 3 PhDs in Fashion to bring clarity to the field by covering the most relevant definitions and terminology in a series of articles. In the process, we decided to improve the quality and relevancy of Wikipedia pages as well. Again, we did not mean to break any rules but simply update the definitions and provide relevant citations to the updated, corrected, and improved content. Do remove the citations if you feel our approach is wrong, but kindly retain the updated and correct definitions. Best, Larnaux (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- By adding links to your own website you are definitely breaking our rules, and WP:PAID (and the mandatory disclosures) absolutely do apply to you. MrOllie (talk) 20:45, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Not sure what you want me to do from this point on. But, before we say goodbye, have a look at the current definition, please:
- "Fashion design is the art of applying design, aesthetics, clothing construction and natural beauty to clothing and its accessories."
- "natural beauty? What do they mean by 'natural'? Or 'beauty'? Who's idea of natural beauty? Yours? Mine? How much natural beauty is applied?
- Best, Larnaux (talk) 20:57, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- What I want you to do is comply with Wikipedia policy - make the required disclosures (again, see WP:PAID). Don't add links to your company's website. When you want to edit something related to your company, instead make a suggestion on the associated article's talk page rather than making an edit yourself. Or, alternatively, I suppose you won't be in violation if you simply stop making such edits entirely. I'm not interested in debating wording changes with you here. MrOllie (talk) 21:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the eye-opening conversation; I had no idea that improving Wikipedia pages with correct definitions and relevant terminology is seen as merely "wording changes." Larnaux (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- A change of words seems pretty plain-language. But the PAID requirement is non-negotiable no matter swapping a wrong homonym, adding a missing comma, correcting the spelling of someone's name, or changing an erroneous statement. It's great when WP:EXPERTs are able to contribute improved content (again, any kind of improvement), but surely a researcher would have their reliable sources to cite, not just their say-so or recollection. DMacks (talk) 02:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for the eye-opening conversation; I had no idea that improving Wikipedia pages with correct definitions and relevant terminology is seen as merely "wording changes." Larnaux (talk) 21:20, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- What I want you to do is comply with Wikipedia policy - make the required disclosures (again, see WP:PAID). Don't add links to your company's website. When you want to edit something related to your company, instead make a suggestion on the associated article's talk page rather than making an edit yourself. Or, alternatively, I suppose you won't be in violation if you simply stop making such edits entirely. I'm not interested in debating wording changes with you here. MrOllie (talk) 21:07, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- By adding links to your own website you are definitely breaking our rules, and WP:PAID (and the mandatory disclosures) absolutely do apply to you. MrOllie (talk) 20:45, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Yes, I am part of LARA Media Group, and I assume you can see my edits through the lens of "indirect compensation." In reality, we had endless internal problems with our writers covering subjects according to Wikipedia's content, terminology, and definitions to the point we employed 3 PhDs in Fashion to bring clarity to the field by covering the most relevant definitions and terminology in a series of articles. In the process, we decided to improve the quality and relevancy of Wikipedia pages as well. Again, we did not mean to break any rules but simply update the definitions and provide relevant citations to the updated, corrected, and improved content. Do remove the citations if you feel our approach is wrong, but kindly retain the updated and correct definitions. Best, Larnaux (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2023 (UTC)
- Let's be more specific: Are you an employee of Lara Media, publishers of thevou.com? MrOllie (talk) 20:10, 27 August 2023 (UTC)