Hello Taylor-winnie-bk. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.
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, and if it does not, 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:Taylor-winnie-bk. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Taylor-winnie-bk|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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Jytdog (talk) 19:08, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:Taylor-winnie-bk, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Taylor-winnie-bk|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Jytdog (talk) 19:15, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
You still have not responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying you may be blocked from editing. Jytdog (talk) 20:01, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I am an employee of Brand Knew, and our client is Morgan Creek. Morgan Creek has recently rebranded, and we'd like to update their Wikipedia page to reflect new changes to the brand. These updates are not intended to be promotional in nature; rather, we want to ensure that the brand changes are consistent on all properties across the web. Please let me know how I'm able to update the Morgan Creek Wikipedia page appropriately. I am happy to include in my user profile that I am indirectly compensated for making each change. If this is not possible, how can we move forward?
Thank you for explicitly disclosing. Please add to your userpage, User:Taylor-winnie-bk (a redlink, since you haven't written anything there yet), the first line of your note above, so that the disclosure is done there. Once you do that, I can walk you through what we expect of paid editors. Please reply here, just below this, after you have added the disclosure to your userpage. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 20:46, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Confirming that I have added the disclosure to my userpage. We are ready to move forward with next steps.
Thanks for taking care of that. Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting -- when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once (with one colon), then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and so on, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. Threading/indenting also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And you already have this part down, but at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit. That is how we know who said what to whom and when.
Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).
I know this is unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Will discuss next steps in a new section below. Jytdog (talk) 20:59, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent editing history at Morgan Creek Entertainment Group shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.
Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. Jytdog (talk) 19:16, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The first thing I would like you to be aware of, is the mission of Wikipedia, the strategy through which we realize it, and why we work that way. Would you please have a read of User:Jytdog/How, which I wrote to help people like you, understand what we actually do here? Please read it over, and then reply, and I can explain the logistics you should follow... thanks. Jytdog (talk) 21:01, 10 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for sending this. I have reviewed and found it very helpful. The next steps I'd like to take are changing the title of the Morgan Creek Entertainment Group Wikipedia page and adding the 'Reboot plans' section to the page. I believe I have submitted the proper requests. Please confirm if I have done so.
OK< so concretely.. what we ask of editors who have a COI or who are paid, and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:
a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and
b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to
(i) disclose at the Talk page of the article with the Template:Connected contributor (paid) tag, putting it at the bottom of the beige box at the top of the page; and
(ii) propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. Just open a new section on the talk page, put the proposed content there formatted just as you would if you were adding it directly to the article, and just below the header (at the top of the editing window) place the {{request edit}} tag to flag it for other editors to review.
By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies.
But understanding the mission, and the policies and guidelines through which we realize the mission, is very important! for an overview of what Wikipedia is and is not (we are not a directory or a place to promote anything). Please be aware that you have created a Wikipedia account, and this makes you a Wikipedian - you are obligated to pursue Wikipedia's mission first and foremost when you work here, and you are obligated to edit according to the policies and guidelines. Editing Wikipedia is a privilege that is freely offered to all, but the community restricts or completely takes that privilege away from people who will not edit and behave as Wikipedians.
I hope that makes sense to you.
With regard to moving the page, you have already set up a move request, so now you wait and see what the consensus of the editing community is.
With regard to the "reboot"request, I will reopen that, now that you have disclosed (which was essential) and taken some time to understand what we actually do here. Someone will respond to that presently.
Hello, I'm following up in regards to both requests. We haven't heard a consensus on either of them. Is this something I should resubmit after disclosing? Thank you for your help. Taylor-winnie-bk (talk) 18:08, 12 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, checking in again regarding the move for Morgan Creek Entertainment. It looks like a majority of the sources have opposed the move; however, I'm not seeing anywhere that a consensus has been reached. Is there anywhere to tell if this is the case? Thank you for your help. Taylor-winnie-bk (talk) 01:28, 18 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. The thread is Paid edits by Taylor-winnie-bk. The discussion is about the topics Vanessa Van Edwards and Laura Wasser. The discussion concerns the absence of COI notices such as