Talk:The Moons

Revert edits
, as WP:SPA has made a large revision to the article which includes copyright images, advertorial prose such as, "2012 started as a quite year for Crofts" and unverifiable claims such as, "Insisting that the deal had to be done correctly, Crofts refused to sign the deal unless it was signed on a full moon 21st February.". As this article has been the subject of COI promotion in the past, I have asked Mrrooftop to come here and explain his edits before I take this issue to WP:COIN. I'm basing my feeling that this is a COI case on the fact that many of the files uploaded by the user are copyrighted on the band's various websites and the user claims to have created those works.  Ol Yeller21 Talktome  18:28, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Additional info
Additional information for the article can be found at, , , and at , ,. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 10:44, 3 August 2012 (UTC)

Invitation to disclose
The conflict of interest guideline strongly encourages editors in your position to disclose their affiliation with the topic. When an editor engages in editing behavior that suggests they have an affiliation with the company, but they do not disclose, this raises suspicions that you are editing "on the sly" or are trying to game the system, in particular when multiple accounts are involved and the subject participates in their own AfD discussion.

If you were to consolidate on one account and disclose your conflict of interest, that would be the start for a more productive resolution for everyone and possibly a pathway for future contributions from your organization that are within Wikipedia's guidelines.

I hope you will read my advice and strongly consider disclosing your conflict of interest here. User:King4057 (EthicalWiki) 15:20, 3 August 2012 (UTC)