Namnola

Thanks James, I am in the process of editing it now and changing the projects to a table since I think it's easier to read (I'm basing it on Skidmore, Owings & Merril's Wikipedia Page). Will be finished soon. Best, Nate

I've made a few changes to the article on Hopkins, mostly fixing errors in the syntax and removing the section on awards. It would probably be best to get rid of the table, and format those two entries as a bulleted list. James^x12345 16:59, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

May 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hopkins Architects may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• *[[Princeton University]]: Frick Chemistry Laboratory, [[[New Jersey]], USA (2010)<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.hopkins.co.uk/s/projects/2/101 |title=

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 17:28, 23 May 2014 (UTC)

January 2019

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to PLP Architecture. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 11:56, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Melcous. Thanks for your thoughts. I understand what you are saying and have taken a look at your comments regarding UNC Gillings and writing in a neutral style which are super useful. I def do not want to make this promotional and completely value the integrity of Wikipedia for this purpose. As a next step, why don't I try again with a neutral tone...sound OK? Many thanks NateNamnola (talk) 12:30, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Nate, thanks for your reply. Before you do that, can you please respond to the question below and clarify whether you have a conflict of interest? In particular, if you are editing this article in connection with your work then you must disclose this and abide by WP:PAID. In both cases, you should then not directly edit the article, but should propose changes on the talk page instead. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 21:10, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Hi Melcous, thanks for your reply. Have read this further now. I do work for the company involved but am not being paid to edit the page...in fact I was doing the edits on my own time out of frustration at the state of the page. So that resolves the potential WP:PAID issue but not entirely the conflict of interest. You’re saying that “avoid editing” as stated in the guidelines actually means “must not edit”...correct? I interpreted this differently and perhaps got overzealous in my editing.

So going forward, based on the above, I now think I am only allowed to post ideas in the talk section and can’t correct / modify anything on the page. Is this correct? Nothing at all?

Thanks again, Nate Namnola (talk) 23:21, 30 January 2019 (UTC)

Thanks for clarifying Nate. With paid editing it is requiring, with conflict of interest it is strongly preferred, that you suggest changes on the talk page rather than edit the article directly. This also means your edits are more likely to 'stick' as they will have been reviewed and agreed by multiple editors, plus they can help tidy up anything like formatting or referencing which can be tricky if you are a new editor. So yes, the best thing to do is to go to the talk page and make suggestions. This can most easily done by using the Template:Request edit and usually the best thing to do is make one concrete suggestion at a time - e.g. Please change x to y, or please add z, and provide a reference. While this is slower than making lots of changes at once, again it makes the process more manageable and is more likely to provide long lasting improvements to the article. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 03:33, 31 January 2019 (UTC)

Got it, Melcous. Thanks for taking the time to clarify. I will proceed on this basis. Learned something new today! All best, Nate Namnola (talk) 10:54, 1 February 2019 (UTC)

Conflict of interest and promotional editing

Hello, Namnola. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Melcous (talk) 11:58, 30 January 2019 (UTC)