User talk:Amber.bach

August 2023
Hi Amber.bach! I noticed that you recently marked an edit as minor&#32;at List of artificial intelligence artists that may not have been. "Minor edit" has a very specific definition on Wikipedia—it refers only to superficial edits that could never be the subject of a dispute, such as typo corrections or reverting obvious vandalism. Any edit that changes the meaning of an article is not a minor edit, even if it only concerns a single word. Please see Help:Minor edit for more information. Thank you. Belbury (talk) 19:10, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * okay i will add it again but not mark it as minor edits, thanks Amber.bach (talk) 22:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion.  MrOllie (talk) 21:40, 28 August 2023 (UTC)


 * i did not add any promotional material. what did you consider as promotional, to make sure i modify the text Amber.bach (talk) 22:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)
 * The content you are adding is in fact blatantly promotional, from top to bottom. Are you associated with the artist in some fashion? MrOllie (talk) 00:49, 29 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Amber.bach. 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:Amber.bach. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. 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. MrOllie (talk) 16:23, 29 August 2023 (UTC)


 * MrOllie, this is my first contribution to wikipedia so the tone might have been off, but I am not being paid for these edits. My goal is to include information about a notable artist in an objective and impartial manner, with all the info strongly backed by relevant, independent sources. The artist objectively belongs to the lists I edited, as demonstrated by the references provided I welcome any advice, guidance and pointers on how to make these edits better. Amber.bach (talk) 18:18, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You've been adding blatantly promotional text, including inappropriate external links to the artist's website. It is hard to imagine why you'd do this if you aren't being paid or associated with the artist in some way. MrOllie (talk) 18:37, 29 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Happy to take any constructive feedback, but please guide and educate instead of jumping to conclusions. I have been following this artist for some time, and I wanted to address what I believe are glaring omissions. In retrospect, I can see that some of the wording in my first edits might have been too enthusiastic. However, this was not the case in subsequent edits. For example, the last edit to List of artificial intelligence artists was rejected despite being minimal, factual and backed by a reference to a BBC article about the artist's use of AI. I understand the need for gatekeeping, but it is disappointing to see it done at the price of keeping relevant information out of Wikipedia and discouraging the participation of new contributors. Amber.bach (talk) 23:46, 29 August 2023 (UTC)