User talk:Braden.bonner

Welcome!

Hello, Braden.bonner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! -- Jytdog (talk) 23:11, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Manual of Style

License tagging for File:La Salle College High School Logo.svg
Thanks for uploading File:La Salle College High School Logo.svg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 04:07, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia
Hi Braden. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date are all about LaSalle... I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and questions for you below.

Hello, Braden.bonner. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Comments and question
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by out WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some connection with LaSalle? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a connection, please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Thanks!

You can reply here - I am watching this page. Once you do, we can take it from there. Thanks in advance for talking! Jytdog (talk) 23:14, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi Jytdog - I am very much affiliated with La Salle (an alumnus and an employee) so I have no problem disclosing that information. My interest in keeping the page current is not so much part of my position at La Salle but as my interest as an alumnus. I completely understand the apparent conflict of interest and will try to reduce any activity that I have on the page, my goal was simply to make the factual information more current and remove extraneous and 'unencyclopedic' information from the page. I very much share in that mission and have no problem with the level of objectivity that is expected of Wikipedia. Braden.bonner (talk) 01:43, 10 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Hi, thanks for answering and for disclosing the two connections you have with La Salle. You do have a conflict of interest with regard to the the article on the school.  To finish the disclosure, would you please consider adding a disclosure on your User page, (here: User:Braden.bonner) along the lines of "I work for "La Salle College High School") ?  (note - I've gone ahead and added at tag to the box at the top of the La Salle talk page communicating to other editors there, that you have a COI, so the talk page disclosure is taken care of)


 * That was the disclosure step. There is a second step in Wikipedia's COI management process - namely peer review.  What we ask editors with a COI to do, is offer suggestions on the Talk page for others to review instead of directly editing the article.   Going forward, please do not directly edit articles where you have a COI, but rather offer suggestions at the article's Talk page.  You can do that easily -  and provide notice to the community of your request -  by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline.  I made that easy for you by adding a section to the very bottom of the beige box at the top of the Talk page -  there is a link at "click here" in that section --  if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.  Would you please do that going forward?   This is all described in our WP:COI guideline.  Please note that it is OK for you to directly make simple, noncontroversial (broadly defined) changes directly to the article -- things like number of employees or address.  Those things of course need to be reliably sourced per WP:VERIFY and WP:RS and need to be neutrally stated per WP:NPOV.  Would you please refrain from the directly editing the article going forward, with those few exceptions?  Thanks.  And thanks again for talking. Jytdog (talk) 10:02, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Oh - on the article Talk page you referred to me as an admin. I am not an admin - just an experienced wikipedian who works on COI issues along with my other work here. :) Jytdog (talk) 10:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Braden, I've gone ahead and created your user page for you so you can post your conflict of interest declaration. I feel the question I asked you on the article's talk page is a fair, and important one. One way or another your actions are coveted under our COI guidelines, but if maintaining the school's internet presence is a part of your job then you also fall under Wikimedia policy found at WP:TOU. There has been a history of promotional editing at this article. That is not an uncommon phenomenon at private school articles. I'm hoping your honesty here is a signal that we can all work together to build a proper encyclopedia article. BTW, I am not an administrator either, just a cocky guy who edits lots of school articles. Happy editing! John from Idegon (talk) 06:44, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Investigation for possible "sockpuppetry"
Hi. Please be aware that someone has requested a sockpuppet investigation (SPI) involving you. In a nutshell, this means someone believes you have been editing under two or more accounts and/or IP addresses in order to violate Wikipedia's editing policies.

Read the sockpuppetry policy (WP:SOCK), as well as the page where the allegation against you is being hashed out (Sockpuppet investigations/Braden.bonner).

Some examples of sockpuppetry would include editing under multiple accounts in order to make it appear that some particular position in a dispute has more support than it already has — or to avoid the appearance of an "edit war" (WP:EW) by making it look like multiple editors disagree with some contentious bit of editing — or when someone who has been blocked/banned from editing tries to defy their block by appearing to be someone else.

A related policy violation, known as meatpuppetry, is when someone recruits other people, not otherwise interested in Wikipedia, to collaborate with or support them in a dispute. It's certainly OK to tell other people about Wikipedia and try to get them interested in editing, but if someone gets other people to support his/her agenda so he/she don't get in trouble for overzealously advancing his/her viewpoint and battling editors who disagree, that's crossing the line.

I am not saying you are, in fact, engaging in sockpuppetry or meatpuppetry — I am simply alerting you to the fact that an allegation has been made, and (hopefully) giving you some idea of what it means so you can either respond intelligently to the accusations or (if they are true) mend your ways.

You may wish to comment on the SPI in the "Comments by other users" section of your SPI page. Please note, however, that the only question to be discussed in a sockpuppet investigation is whether or not sockpuppetry (or meatpuppetry) is involved. An SPI is not the place for arguing for or against specific viewpoints or content in an article; there are other places for hashing out such disputes, but not SPI. — Rich wales (no relation to Jimbo) 02:27, 10 August 2015 (UTC)