Michael.greenacre

The Millennium Song

This is an automated message from CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of The Millennium Song, and it appears to include a substantial copy of http://www.jrsolutions.net/theron/millennium.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. See our copyright policy for further details. (If you own the copyright to the previously published content and wish to donate it, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for the procedure.)

This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on the maintainer's talk page. CorenSearchBot (talk) 15:01, 11 August 2010 (UTC)

I saw the above automated message added to the article The Millennium Song but I decided to assume good faith by removing the notice and replacing it with {{unreferenced}}; diff is here. However, it appears you have not taken the hint. This article is in danger of deletion due to RS issues and perhaps COPYVIO too. The article remains unreferenced by reliable sources and has been marked again as such. If you are the writer, Michael Greenacre, mentioned in the article, then you also have a conflict of interest and should step back from editing the article forthwith --Senra (talk) 17:50, 12 August 2010 (UTC)

Resurrected "The Millennium Song"

Hi. I have had your deleted article, The Millennium Song moved to your user-space here User:Michael.greenacre/The Millennium Song. If you would like my help to improve the article so it does not get deleted again, please ask me on my talk page --Senra (talk) 17:34, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Michael.greenacre. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Principal component analysis, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 15:40, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

October 2024

Hello, I'm Belbury. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Principal component analysis have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Be aware that under Wikipedia's WP:SELFCITE guideline, "adding numerous references to work published by yourself and none by other researchers is considered to be a form of spamming". Belbury (talk) 16:15, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at Principal component analysis, you may be blocked from editing. Belbury (talk) 16:24, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you use Wikipedia for promotion or advertising. Stop citing your own papers. Belbury (talk) 16:34, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

I am not adertising!!! I am co-author (5 co-authors, I happen to be first mentioned) of a paper in Nature Reviews which is exactly on the topic of this entry, in fact it has the same name. We have hundreds of citations to this paper, and so I cannot see why I cannot add it to the reference list of this topic! Michael.greenacre (talk) 18:19, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Hi Michael, thanks for responding. The issue is that you have a conflict of interest. A person who only adds references to their own papers is considered to be undertaking "a form of spamming" in the eyes of Wikipedia.

You are welcome to make an edit request on Talk:Principal component analysis saying that you are Michael Greenacre and that you think the article would benefit from your paper being added as a footnote, so that other editors can review or discuss this. See WP:MAKINGEREQ for how to make such a request, or you can use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Belbury (talk) 18:28, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Dear Belbury, I left a note on the Talk. I've done very few edits of Wikipedia pages, but I'm learning fast through this experience. I'm not sure why you say our paper be "added as a footnote", because it should be a reference. I see many other references in this topic that I would consider quite minor and I really don't know how they got there! Best wishes from Michael Greenacre, Professor of Statistics, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, Barcelona. Michael.greenacre (talk) 20:03, 21 October 2024 (UTC)

Recent COI edit request

Following on from your recent COI edit request [1] at Principal component analysis, the conclusion was as follows:

The edit request to include the citation can be implemented. However, the requesting editor is advised that self-promotion is very strongly discouraged on Wikipedia and that their past editing appears to have been in breach of the policies on WP:SELFCITE and WP:CITESPAM. However, it is accepted that until very recently the contributor had been unaware of the relevant policies. Moving forwards, if any future similar requests are made they will be assessed solely against the contents of the relevant Wikipedia policies. The user is thus strongly encouraged to expand their contributions beyond edits specifically related to themselves, e.g. by adding citations to other academics, or by contributing to articles entirely outside of their area of academic speciality. Axad12 (talk) 10:21, 31 October 2024 (UTC)