JamesWarmly

April 2023

Hello, I'm Hadal. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Bengal cat have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Other similar links have been removed from other pet breed articles, because it appears you are promoting your own website. See also: WP:Linkspam --Hadal (talk) 23:00, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Hello Hadal,

Thank you for your message and for your diligence in maintaining the quality of Wikipedia articles. I appreciate your concern regarding the external links I added to the Bengal cat article and other pet breed articles.

However, I believe my site doesn't violate the guidelines as it provides valuable educational information without any financial gain. There are no advertisements on the site, and it serves purely as a source of knowledge for users. In each instance where I added a link to my site, it was in response to a citation needed on the respective Wiki pages. My site offers credible sources for the information backing up the claims made in the Wiki articles.

I understand that it might seem as if I am promoting my own website, but my intention is solely to contribute to Wikipedia with relevant, reliable, and verifiable information. I kindly ask you to reconsider the removal of the links and, if necessary, to engage in further discussion about their appropriateness.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. I'm happy to address them and work together to ensure the accuracy and quality of information on Wikipedia.

Best regards,

James JamesWarmly (talk) 20:08, 20 April 2023 (UTC)

With all due respect, I must again point out the reasons why your editing behaviour is not acceptable:

• Wikipedia is not a link farm, and it is not a place to promote your own website. See again WP:Linkspam.
• You also have an inherent conflict of interest with respect to your website. It does not matter whether your website is overtly commercial or not. Even non-profit NGOs fall under the same restrictions at Wikipedia.
• To this end I will also be leaving a boilerplate notice on your talk page explaining how to manage a conflict of interest. Please read if carefully and do not edit any more articles without responding to its instructions.
• See also Wikipedia:Reliable sources to learn what kind of references we prefer to see, and why your website does not qualify. Take special note of the section on questionable and self-published sources. We see a lot of covert or "native" advertising. Wikipedia is not a tool for SEO.
• While your username is not a blatant violation of our username policy, it is skirting the line. You may want to consider changing it to "James at Warmly". See Wikipedia:Username policy#Usernames implying shared use.
• While I am an administrator, I am only human; and in most other respects I am just another editor. If you believe I have acted improperly in this matter, you can seek third opinions via Wikipedia:Dispute resolution.

Please let me know if you have any further questions about the above. Remember, please do not edit any more articles without responding to the COI notice. Thanks --Hadal (talk) 15:21, 4 May 2023 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello JamesWarmly. 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:JamesWarmly. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=JamesWarmly|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. --Hadal (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2023 (UTC)