User talk:Bethmenzies

Welcome
 Hi, and Welcome to Wikipedia!   My name is &Lambda;ua&int; Wi  se  and I have been on Wikipedia for sometime now. I have been wandering around when I saw your name and decided to drop by to see if you need help with Wikipedia. I have also attached this list of some links that might help you: You should also note that you have to sign your comments by using four of those ~ at the end of your messages (i.e. ~, this will simply place your user name and date; see my signature at the end of this message as an example.) Please do not hesitate to contact me should you have a question or require help with Wikipedia, you can leave me a new message here. P.S. Some new users find editing Wikipedia a bit difficult at first, but it only seems this way. In fact it is quite easy to get used to editing it and actually finding that enjoyable ! :) Good luck! :) &Lambda;ua&int; Wi  se  (Operibus anteire) 18:14, 18 February 2008 (UTC)
 * WP:Tutorial
 * WP:How to edit a page
 * WP:How to write a great article
 * WP:Manual of Style.

Re:
Hello! The simplest way to see what it does is to try it yourself! Right now, reach for that edit button and type ~, save and see what happens! It will place your name and date, so that others know who is leaving messages on talkpages, go ahead and do it! Cheers! :) &Lambda;ua&int; Wi  se  (Operibus anteire) 09:34, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Okay
Ok Beth no problem! If you have any query, you know where to reach me! ;) &Lambda;ua&int; Wi  se  (Operibus anteire) 11:40, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, you insert your signature only on talk pages and not articles!
 * &Lambda;ua&int; Wi  se  (Operibus anteire) 15:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

COI
Hi, I notice you have been adding links to willpearson.co.uk to multiple articles. Also that you created an article on Will Pearson. I suspect that you may have a conflict of interest and that what you are engaged is considered spamming. If you have a conflict of interest then you need to be bringing the links up for discussion on each articles talk, not merely adding them without discussion to multiple articles. Please read SPAM. Mfield (talk) 17:33, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
 * re your comments to another editor about my issues with your posting of ELs. No my nose has not been 'put out of joint' by you adding these links. I was questioning several points...


 * Firstly, do you know Will Pearson in some capacity? If you do then you should declare that fact as you have a conflict of interest. A look at your contributions history would strongly suggest that you do as it only consists of his article and adding links to it. Adding links to multiple articles with no other contributions is spammy in nature already, without having some connection to the site owner in question. Mfield (talk) 01:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)


 * Secondly, there is a large difference between what I do, which is relicense some of my imagery under a CC license to Wikipedia/Wikimedia, and adding external links to commercial websites with content that remains copyrighted. I do not add links to my website to articles as that would be spamming, and I expect the same to be true of other photographers. That is policy. Please feel free to ask me questions about this, which I will answer truhfully and accurately, I have never made any secret of my business in the years I have been contributing to WP and if it was a problem it would surely have come up by now. I hope this clarifies my, and the communities, positions somewhat. Mfield (talk) 01:23, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * And re. the deletion, I nominated the Will Pearson article for deletion as he does not meet the WP:Notability guideline, having inadequate third party reliable sources to establish it, the article probably could bespeedied but I thought it should be discussed first. Mfield (talk) 01:29, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello - I don't know how to respond to you directly - so am editing this page in the hope that you can see it?

Do I know Will Pearson? Yes I do - I'm his fiance! I am also a photographer's agent, and so think that it's reasonable that I can write an article without a conflict of interest. We frequently have publications getting in touch who have looked for information about Will, and so a Wiki article makes sense to me - especially as other people can add to it with further sources. If I haven't done this correctly, please accept my apologies, I'm a bit new to all of this. If you could suggest anything else that would help with the article then I can add that? Your guidance would be appreciated.

Re the guidelines you linked to:

"Conflict of interest often presents itself in the form of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates.

Examples of these types of material include:

1. Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites (commercial links). 2. Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages. 3. Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article."

This doesn't seem to be relevant - he is not obscure, which can be demonstrated as he is an exhibiting artists, is featured in the press etc.

"Closeness to a subject does not mean you're incapable of being neutral, but it may incline you towards some bias. Be guided by the advice of other editors. If editors on a talk page suggest in good faith that you may have a conflict of interest, try to identify and minimize your biases, and consider withdrawing from editing the article. As a rule of thumb, the more involvement you have with a topic in real life, the more careful you should be with our core content policies"

Noted - and yes, I may well be biassed I guess! But I hope that I can demonstrate enough external sources that it doesn't matter. Again, your guidance would be appreciated if you have some comments about this. (I don't know what 'speedied' means?)

External links - I have read quite a bit about this on Wikipedia, and I hope there's nothing untoward about this. I have not linked to the main page or anything salesy on the site, rather I have simply added links to content which is highly relevant to the subject. As far as I can understand from what I have read, this seems to be encouraged. Am I wrong on this?

Thanks for your help and input :-)
 * You most certainly do have a conflict of interest and adding further links to your fiances site without discussion will be classified as spamming by almost everyone. The problem you have is that without an established history of contribution to the site other than adding these links, and without a history of discussion and consensus with other editors, your actions are likely to be treated as bad faith. What you need to do is to bring the links up for discussion on each article talk - you need to make it clear that you have a conflict of interest as well. Do not add them to the article yourself or they stand a 99% chance of being reverted. You need to put them up for discussion, with a summary of why you think they are appropriate, and let uninvolved editors decide and put them in if they agree. I am not suggesting for a moment that this will even result in many getting added, I purposely have not even bothered suggesting links to VR tours of mine as I am aware that there would be a lot of accusations of spamming. WP takes a strong line on it (I believe rightfully) due to the constant barrage of external links that get added for purely promotional reasons. External links do not get crawled by the search engines, so extra traffic from that is irrelevant, but that does not stop editors from coming along and spamming a link to their site across multiple articles. It is exactly this pattern of activity that raises immediate red flags.


 * The passage you quoted on COI applies itself more to article creation than merely adding ELs, by that I mean it is easier for your article contributions to your fiances article to be measured and controlled and taken in good faith. The bar for notability}} on articles of artists and photographers is pretty high though, and requires multiple reliable sources - especially non industry related publications. WPs policy on reliable sources effectively prevents article notability without a good degree of independent third party coverage, which makes articles on subjects in the public eye much easier to prove notability for that those that aren't. That's just the way it works. [[User:Mfield|Mfield (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

December 2008
Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. As eyerevolutions is your company, and you've already been warned about COI on your fiance's article you should know better. Blowdart | talk 00:39, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Since Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by some search engines, including Google. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Blowdart | talk 00:42, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Blowdart | talk 00:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Blowdart | talk 00:44, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Note to other editors
User:Bethmenzies has not added any further links since I explained the situation above. Please check the date before posting further warnings. Mfield (talk) 00:54, 11 December 2008 (UTC)