User talk:30sos

Response to message on my talk page from MrBill3
You're more than welcome. Your contributions have been great so far. The article Canadian College of Naturopathic Medicine really needed some good RS (reliable sources, WP:RS). I am going to do a few tweaks to the references but they are good sources and well cited.

Just to let you know that if you are associated with the subject of an article that constitutes a conflict of interest. If that is the case it is appropriate to post suggested edits to the talk page of the article and ask another editor to actually edit the article (if this is the case I would be happy to assist, your edits are good content and well sourced). I am not assuming any conflict of interest, I just noticed the CCNM article is the only one you have edited, if it's just where you started editing no worries. I also want to let you know you have a right to anonymity on wikipedia, in disclosing any possible COI you may maintain anonymity. Leaving a message on my talk page is entirely appropriate, in general I would reply on the same page to maintain continuity and leave a talkback message here, but as the content of this discussion is specific to you and your edits, I figured here was better. You may respond here and I will know as I have added this page to my watchlist. Anything specific to the content of the article should go on the talk page for the article.

So far your editing seems way above average, welcome to wikipedia and enjoy. - - MrBill3 (talk) 02:58, 5 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Ha, you flatter me. But I do appreciate it nonetheless. You're right, I do have a conflict of interest. I didn't think about it, but it makes sense now that you mention it. I've declared as such in the article's talk page alongside with my proposed edits. Thanks for your helpfulness and professionalism too. 30sos (talk) 17:30, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * I appreciate your forthrightness in declaring a COI regarding an article you have edited. You may find the following essay useful Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Your declaration on the talk page of the article is an appropriate step, I have placed it in a separate section and marked it do not archive (I'll probably set up archiving on that talk page as it grows).
 * I will take a look at your proposed edits as soon as I get a chance. At first glance they look like they contain information that should be included in the article and the proposed layout changes seem to make sense. The strong support by references is important and useful. The more third party references the better. I will probably do some rewriting to make the material more concise and encyclopedic, I will post suggested edits on the talk page of the article.
 * I am glad to be helpful, professionalism is a misnomer, we are all volunteers here on WP. I enjoy editing WP and use it as a valuable resource so I am motivated to make it the best possible. I particularly value achieving accurate, concise and neutral articles through consensus. Looking forward to ongoing collaboration. - - MrBill3 (talk) 01:35, 8 October 2013 (UTC)