User talk:BarbaraDD

Hello, BarbaraDD. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 18:29, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

August 2016
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Vivian Beaumont Theater, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:33, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:49, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

Magnolia677 - please advise what conflict of interest is being considered. I have been open about my intentions and purpose. I have added references/citations to any comments I've made - you removed any others that did not have them. I am looking for references for these others and won't post these changes until certifiable references are available.

I assure you my intentions are sincere in trying to help my client, who does not have the technology skills necessary, to update Wikipedia information on built projects they have been involved with as the structural engineer. If you note, in most instances, there was already a architect firm mentioned previously (most were not referenced/cited) and I simply wanted to add the engineer information to complement the architect information. These two entities work in tandem for any built project.

Please advise what I can do to resolve this issue. I appreciate your help.

Thank you, Barbara

Barbara,

On August 16th you made this edit to John F. Kennedy International Airport. Your edit was to a section of the article regarding the construction of new terminals at JFK. Your edit read: "Severud Associates was chosen as the firm responsible for structural engineering". A few days later you made this edit to that same article, in which you added this source to support your edit.

In the source you cited, you will note information about the following private companies who worked on the construction of the new terminals at JFK:
 * 1) Armand Corporation - demolition.
 * 2) DMJM - designer and architect.
 * 3) Carter Burgess - project management services.
 * 4) Corgan - architects.
 * 5) ARUP - construction.
 * 6) JGA Inc - retail designers.
 * 7) Illuminating Concepts - entertainment, lighting, and so forth.
 * 8) LoganLM LLC - contracted to modify and expand an existing outbound baggage handling system.
 * 9) Silvester + Tafuro - programmers and interior designers.
 * 10) McClier - M&E engineers.
 * 11) Holmes & Narver - communications and security consultants.
 * 12) Severud Associates - structural engineers.
 * 13) Cage Inc - baggage system consultants.
 * 14) SBLD - lighting designers.
 * 15) Argus Consulting - fueling system designers.
 * 16) SIMCO - traffic engineers.
 * 17) CCI - code consultants.
 * 18) Donnelly Design - signage consultants.
 * 19) Conti Group - runway refurbishment.
 * 20) Parabit Systems - installation of digital signage kiosks.

Yet, of those 20 companies, the only one you mentioned in your edit is the company that paid you "to have their Wiki page updated".

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not your company's webpage or a place for free advertising.

I hope this explains my concern. I'd suggest that until this is resolved, you make no edits to any article related to your employer. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 21:37, 19 August 2016 (UTC)


 * Also, please place the paid template code on your user page to satisfy the mandatory disclosure of paid editing. Thanks. --Drm310 (talk) 07:57, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Magnolia -

I believe this is the correct way to respond to your comments above. Please let me know if it's not.

As I know nothing of the other firms that are listed as having been involved with this project, I could not possibly add this information. It is my understanding that Wiki pages can be created with partial information and others who are informed can add additional information. I thought the whole point of Wiki is that collaborative information is added to make a Wiki page robust and fully informed, sometimes a little at a time and not all at once. Certainly this is true when new information or updates are required.

As I mentioned originally, the architect firm information is listed on this and many other buildings and built projects on Wiki. This seems to be a standard. Why then could the structural engineer not also be noted?

Severud has also asked that I update their Severud Wiki page which was created years ago. (They aren't sure who created it, the firm was not involved). Again, I am simply attempting to add updated information regarding the firm. I have removed outdated information (office locations) and added industry organizations that they are affiliated with. This cross referencing of industry organizations that are involved with my client is meant to be informative for anyone wanting to know more about Severud as a structural engineering company.

I have mentioned that I am new to this and genuinely trying to make clean edits on behalf of my client. This is not dishonest or "marketing" but instead a method to update Wiki, which is open to all people who want to add new or more complete information to a given Wiki page. As I recently created a new website for Severud, much of this "outdated/incomplete" information came to light as we were reviewing content for their new website.

Lastly, I was advised to add "the disclosure to my user page.  Happy to do this but don't see where to add it.

Please let me know your opinion above as I am in limbo on making any additional edits.

Thank you, Barbara


 * I have placed the disclosure notice on your user page, User:BarbaraDD. You can look at Template:Paid if you think that this can be fine-tuned to your particular circumstances. --Drm310 (talk) 16:30, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Drm310 - nope, that's perfect! Thanks for your adding it and your help. Barbara


 * You're welcome, Barbara. Just one other reminder - when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts using the preferred method for Wikipedia editors. There are two ways to do this. Either:
 * Add four tildes ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.
 * This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when. --Drm310 (talk) 16:50, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks again Drm310 for your help. I really HAVE been reading about all the Wiki rules and regulations, suggestions and laws :) but obviously haven't gotten them all down. Appreciate the help.  --BarbaraDD (talk) 17:07, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Magnolia677 -

I see that you have once again removed my edits for the Severud Associates page. This time, I only added information regarding associations that the firm is involved with. I also explained several times that while I am being paid to do this, it is not marketing, it simply updating their Wiki page. They do not have anyone on staff to do this. As far as I can tell, it is not against Wiki rules to make a post if you have been paid to do so. And thanks to Drm310, my page states that I am being paid. Please tell me what issue you have now with my recent posts? This time, you didn't bother to let me know, I discovered it when my client asked again why this page has not yet been updated.

I also noted that you have removed the update I made for the Beacon theater despite the fact that I included a citation showing the architect firm's website page that states Severud was the structural engineer. How is this not correct?

I feel that I am being unfairly judged and wonder if ANY posts I make can be appropriately handled. If I have made an error, please let me know. However, in my estimation the changes made to the Severud page were acceptable as they were not subjective but only facts concerning the organizations that Severud is involved with. Why is that a problem?

How can we involve a Wiki arbitrator? At this point, it doesn't seem as if you will allow me to post anything, even when it conforms to Wiki guidelines, simply because I am being paid. I believe that you have taken this way outside of the realm of Wiki maintenance and it has become a vendetta.

Please advise how we can best resolve this. If Wikipedia cannot be updated, then what is the point? --BarbaraDD (talk) 17:21, 23 August 2016 (UTC)


 * The bulk of your edits were adding a "roster of awards" your employer has received, as well as its mentoring programs and work with non-profit organizations. I have no problem with editors discussing the good things a company does.  My problem is that you are employed by that company and are cherry picking only positive items to add to Wikipedia.  Did you know your employer was mentioned in this article regarding contractors that were trying to escape a $40 million lawsuit over damages to New York City's Bellevue Hospital?  How you would feel about adding that to the article?  Magnolia677 (talk) 18:54, 23 August 2016 (UTC)

Magnolia - those were not awards that were added. They are industry organizations that Severud is associated with. You are trying to find evil intent where there is none. --BarbaraDD (talk) 19:22, 23 August 2016 (UTC)


 * BarbaraDD, my recommendation to you would be to find reliable secondary third party references first before proposing an edit. For example, if you want to add an industry award, you need to bring a secondary source: let's a NYTimes articles which reports that the said company has received the said award. This is the way we edit on Wikipedia. Sources are everything. (Your edits btw are not being reverted because you are a paid editor. They are being reverted because they do not have reliable sources for them). --Lemongirl942 (talk) 08:49, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Lemongirl1942 - thanks for your comments but as I noted in my last post, these are NOT industry awards. Rather, they are simply a listing of the industry organizations that Severud is associated with. The organization is the source of reference. --BarbaraDD (talk) 11:02, 25 August 2016 (UTC)