User talk:Cvaage

Paid editing
Hello Cvaage. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. 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. 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, 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:Cvaage. 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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Hammersoft (talk) 18:05, 3 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Thank you for complying with our paid editing policy. Please be aware that editing in the manner you have already done on the Act Global article is not acceptable. Wikipedia is not a means to advertise your company, its products, or its work. We are an encyclopedia that uses a neutral tone in describing the topics for which we have articles. Using such phrasing as you did with "top quality artificial grass...", "a team of seasoned leaders that possess immense experience...", "growing reputation..." and "maintains the highest quality..." reads like advertising copy because that is exactly what it is. As you noted, this edit was "approved by corporate". Our edits are not approved by any company, nor would we allow any company to dictate what content exists on our articles. Given that this article has frequently seen new accounts attempt to use this article for advertising purposes, I strongly urge you to discuss this issue with your company and advise them that this behavior is not acceptable here. If you or anyone else from this company wishes to make changes to the article, I strongly recommend you make such a request on the article's talk page. If you have questions, please ask. --Hammersoft (talk) 20:25, 3 August 2017 (UTC)