MV at Digital Law Group HSF
September 2020 edit
Hello MV at Digital Law Group HSF. 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:MV at Digital Law Group HSF. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=MV at Digital Law Group HSF|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. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 17:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Hi there, thanks for your message. I am not receiving or expecting to receive compensation for my edits. I believe you were referring to my very first attempt at editing earlier (article on Digital Economy), where I cited an example of a retail brand opening an online flagship store on a marketplace. I have no affiliation with the brand cited, and was using that as an example to substantiate the statement that I added to the article. Very happy for that reference to be removed if that is preferred. It was just the first newspaper article that I could find online, although there are tons of other examples that I can observe in daily life. Thanks. MV at Digital Law Group HSF (talk) 17:05, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- Hi there, I was referring to your username which makes it seem as if you are editing for the company. Thank you for the reply and acknowledgement. HickoryOughtShirt?4 (talk) 17:14, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
@HickoryOughtShirt?4: Ah I see! I have added a description of my employer in my User Page in any event for full disclosure. Thanks for the reply.MV at Digital Law Group HSF (talk) 17:19, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure! edit
- Hi MV at Digital Law Group HSF! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.
-- 17:23, Tuesday, September 29, 2020 (UTC)
| Mission 1 | Mission 2 | Mission 3 | Mission 4 | Mission 5 | Mission 6 | Mission 7 |
| Say Hello to the World | An Invitation to Earth | Small Changes, Big Impact | The Neutral Point of View | The Veil of Verifiability | The Civility Code | Looking Good Together |
Independent sources edit
Hello MV at Digital Law Group HSF, please avoid using promotional sources and press releases as references in most cases. Credible encyclopedic sources should generally be independent secondary publications without any affiliation or promotional agenda (aside from some exceptional usages for uncontroversial basic claims). You'll find more details about Wikipedia's criteria for reliable sources at WP:RS. Also, routine business news and PR announcements are generally not relevant for an encyclopedia, unless significant aspects of lasting importance have been covered by independent sources. I hope these tips are helpful, but please feel free to ask at my user talkpage or at WP:Teahouse if you have any further questions. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 19:31, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message GermanJoe. I'm new on Wikipedia so appreciate the comment and guidance. If I remove the reference in the first article on Digital Economy (which is to a newspaper article but about a specific brand), would you be agreeable to undo your revert because I think the addition itself is not advertorial in nature? On the second article on Financial Technology, the references linked are indeed press releases but they are official pages of the Indonesian regulator announcing about their initiatives. On this basis, are the references acceptable? If not, similar as for the first article, what about removing the references but keeping the edit to the body? Thanks again. MV at Digital Law Group HSF (talk) 00:15, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- Aside from some exceptions, you generally need independent 3rd-party sources for verification and should not add content without such sources. If no independent source has reported about these details, they may not be relevant in an encyclopedic sense. Wikipedia as a tertiary source primarily covers information that has been deemed noteworthy by other independent secondary sources first. GermanJoe (talk) 08:37, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
- This is very helpful GermanJoe. I've also read the page on independent sources, and now have a better understanding of how an official press release by a regulator about itself may be seen as not independent. Very interesting, and have lots more to learn about the process! Thanks for taking the time to explain. MV at Digital Law Group HSF (talk) 10:12, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia and copyright edit
Hello MV at Digital Law Group HSF! Your additions to Smart contract have been removed in whole or in part, as they appear to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material is in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. (To request such a release, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission.) While we appreciate your contributions to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from sources to avoid copyright and plagiarism issues.
- You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
- Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify the information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
- We have strict guidelines on the usage of copyrighted images. Fair use images must meet all ten of the non-free content criteria in order to be used in articles, or they will be deleted. All other images must be made available under a free and open license that allows commercial and derivative reuse to be used on Wikipedia.
- If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a legally designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. Understand, though, that unlike many other sites, where a person can license their content for use there and retain non-free ownership, that is not possible at Wikipedia. Rather, the release of content must be irrevocable, to the world, into the public domain (PD) or under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license. Such a release must be done in a verifiable manner, so that the authority of the person purporting to release the copyright is evidenced. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
- Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate from another Wikipedia project or article, you must follow the copyright attribution steps in Wikipedia:Translation#How to translate. See also Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.
It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 10:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)