User talk:Andrew M Nelson

Hello Andrew M Nelson. 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 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:Andrew M Nelson. 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. -- VViking Talk Edits 22:22, 16 December 2019 (UTC)

Hi VViking. I am obviously somewhat new to Wikipedia and just noticed your comments from last December while just updating the bio of Ajit Manocha, the CEO and President of SEMI, which is the semiconductor industry's trade association with over 2 million members. Now I see that my latest updates have been red flagged. I am very embarrassed about this and want to resolve as quickly as possible, but I'm unsure what to do. I am not even sure if this is the proper way to respond to your comments above. You cite lots of options to correct this situation but there are so many I don't know where to start. I did create a Wikipedia account under Andrew M. Nelson, which I thought validated me. Yes, I am paid by SEMI as a contract writer, paid to update his bio. Afterward, I offered to update it on Wikipedia as a favor. There's no promotion or advocacy involved -- the content is all factual, neutral, verifiable. Nonetheless, I understand your policy and the reason for it. Given my ignorance and lack of promotional intent, is there any chance you can remove the flags while we sort out my compliance issue -- please note the flags are on totally neutral and verifiable content. Meanwhile, I'll do my best to try to figure out how to respond to your compliance references. This situation is jeopardizing my relationship with SEMI. Thank you, Andrew M. Nelson.

File permission problem with File:SEMI President and CEO Ajit Manocha 2020 Photo.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:SEMI President and CEO Ajit Manocha 2020 Photo.jpg, which you've attributed to SEMI. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as non-free fair use or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa (talk) 15:36, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Diannaa, thank you for your responsiveness and guidance here. The head of Communications at SEMI simply forwarded the photo to me to update Ajit's site. Neither one of us understood the various copyright and publication issues you bring up here reflecting Wikipedia's policies. I presumed it was taken by SEMI and owned by SEMI for general distribution, especially since it was sent to me for publication on Wikipedia. I will circle back with my contact though and get whatever evidence I can on the source, ownership, copyright, and parameters of its usage. Separately, once this is done, can you stand by to possibly help me publish the photo on his site? That too wasn't clear to me when I tried to do it earlier. Thank you, Mark