RedGuruBoss

Paid editing

Hello RedGuruBoss. 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:RedGuruBoss. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=RedGuruBoss|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. Theroadislong (talk) 09:23, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Creating your clients' "pages"

RedGuruBoss, apart from some other warnings that you will no doubt get from people more conversant with the rules than I am, you--and your clients, especially--need to know this. Assuming you do create an article about (not a page for) one of your clients that passes muster in every way so that it actually stays put in Wikipedia, then neither you nor your client will own the article or control it. Anybody can come in and edit it. You and your client might not like the results. But if the edits are relevant and properly supported by independent and reliable sources, there won't be much you or your client can do about it. Uporządnicki (talk) 19:40, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Hi yes I made a quick edit. I'm not looking for compensation. I actually represent this actor as his manager. We have been removing ages of clients from the internet. we can do it on IMDB and when a client can own there Knowledge Panel they are able to remove it from there as well. But Philip's Knowledge Panel seems to be managed by someone else we don't know. RedGuruBoss (talk) 04:12, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Let's make a couple of points clear:

1. You are being directed by your clients, who employ you, to make edits to the Wikipedia articles about them. By definition, that makes you a paid editor according to Wikipedia's policy on paid editing. It is therefore mandatory and non-negotiable for you to explicitly state which articles you are editing for pay and who is paying you to do it.
2. Neither you nor your clients have any right of ownership or control over articles about them. Articles are neutrally worded, paraphrased summaries of material previously published in reliable and independent sources. The proper procedure for someone in your position is to make edit requests on the talk pages of the articles.

--Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:40, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

my client doesn't employ me. it doesn't quite work like that. since other sites allow actors to control information like AGE in this day and age of ageism, more and more people don't want their ages online.

and I think if someone doesn't want their age listed, that should be respected. 74.64.125.135 (talk) 06:07, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

Your edits

Please pay attention to what Drm310 said above your edits are, I will repeat them below.

1. You are being directed by your clients, who employ you, to make edits to the Wikipedia articles about them. By definition, that makes you a paid editor according to Wikipedia's policy on paid editing. It is therefore mandatory and non-negotiable for you to explicitly state which articles you are editing for pay and who is paying you to do it.
2. Neither you nor your clients have any right of ownership or control over articles about them. Articles are neutrally worded, paraphrased summaries of material previously published in reliable and independent sources. The proper procedure for someone in your position is to make edit requests on the talk pages of the articles.

along with a more formal warning,

• 

  Hello RedGuruBoss. 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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:RedGuruBoss. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=RedGuruBoss|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.

Please heed this advice or you will likely find yourself blocked in the near feature. Regards, --Seawolf35 ^T--C 06:17, 16 November 2024 (UTC)

November 2024

Hello, I noticed that you may have recently made edits while logged out. Please be mindful not to perform controversial edits while logged out, or your account risks being blocked from editing. Please consider reading up on Wikipedia's policy on multiple accounts before editing further. Additionally, making edits while logged out reveals your IP address, which may allow others to determine your location and identity. If this was not your intention, please remember to log in when editing. Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:49, 16 November 2024 (UTC)