User talk:CNC IOR

Hello, CNC IOR. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated 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.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * 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.

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. -- MF-W 18:31, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Dear MF Warburg,

thank you for your notification. We absolutely assure you to only state or correctify data/information that previously has been missing or explained in a misleading and false way. The added fact-based information has always been totally reliable and always been backed up by secondary links/secondary reports, articles etc.

Best regards CNC_IOR

Institute for the Works of Religion
Hello. I understand you do your best to follow Wikipedia policies while editing this article, and several of your edits are useful, but I would still encourage you to be more careful in your editing and maybe stop editing the article and rather make suggestions at the article's talk page. Your edits about the reform may be a bit too detailed and also a bit too "nice". English W--CNC IOR (talk) 16:43, 12 May 2014 (UTC)ikipedia generally discourages people from editing articles on subjects they are closely related to, and in particular paid editing, like editing from your employee. If you edit the article too much you are at risk that the article may be tagged for Conflict of Interest editing which is not good for publicity. I understand you have good intentions of editing within policies and Wikipedia's policy regarding Conflict of Interest editing gives a bit mixed signals, but the safest thing is not too edit the articles; the second safest is to only add very basic information (change in personel etc.). Best regards, Iselilja (talk) 16:37, 12 May 2014 (UTC)

Hello Iselilja, many thanks for your comment. I can assure you that literally all of the changes made - also and especially as regards the reform process - are taken from external sources, most of the time even official documents. I used quotes in order to underline that this does not reflect the IOR's point of view but instead are basic facts (a lot happened in 2013 and also already in 2014 so far, it was not even mentioned in the entry) which were evaluated by international key media. Of course, I would be happy to see other users updating the respective information. As for months this did not happen, I did it myself. I hope you can understand this approach. Best regards, --CNC IOR (talk) 16:44, 12 May 2014 (UTC)
 * Hello again. I saw your message at my talk page and the new edit seemed to include material that was highly relevant for the article. I absolutely understand your frustration with the article not being updated and not holdning a good quality. My concern with your editing is mostly of principal nature; as Wikipedia very strongly discourages employees of editing the article of their employers because such editing is seen to undermine the neutrality of Wikipedia, you can read about this here. (Allthough the signals from Wikipedia isn't fully clear and consistent at the moment; a new set of rules if under way, I believe). The objections to employees editing an article is even bigger when the article includes controversies. If you have more stuff you want to add to the article, I would recommend that you simply make a suggestion at the article's talk page. You can also notify me on my talk page; allthough I am not very familiar with this topic. Best regards, Iselilja (talk) 20:26, 13 May 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Iselilja, I will notify you as regards potential subsequent edits!--CNC IOR (talk) 09:57, 15 May 2014 (UTC)