User talk:Endtoxicaid

How do you feel the aid sector abuses people, staff or people affected by their projects?
The stuff sector is out-dated and based on a colonial model, inherent in that is institutional racism in some organisations and some staff that are abusive in many ways to staff and their "beneficiaries*".


 * People Endtoxicaid (talk) 15:16, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

Recent edit reversion
In this edit here, I reverted some information that appears to be a violation of our copyright policy.

I provided a brief summary of the problem in the edit summary, which should be visible just below my name. You can also click on the "view history" tab in the article to see the recent history of the article. This should be an edit with my name, and a parenthetical comment explaining why your edit was reverted. If that information is not sufficient to explain the situation, please ask.

I do occasionally make mistakes. We get hundreds of reports of potential copyright violations every week, and sometimes there are false positives, for a variety of reasons. (Perhaps the material was moved from another Wikipedia article, or the material was properly licensed but the license information was not obvious, or the material is in the public domain but I didn't realize it was public domain, and there can be other situations generating a report to our Copy Patrol tool that turn out not to be actual copyright violations.) If you think my edit was mistaken, please politely let me know and I will investigate. S Philbrick (Talk)  22:24, 11 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:COI and WP:SHAREDACCOUNT violations
Hello, Endtoxicaid. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Médecins Sans Frontières, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. TimSmit (talk) 04:28, 14 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @TimSmit I don't have an external relationship, I've never worked for them, funded them and never received treatment from them. If you read the citations, I'm afraid they are legitimate journalists writing legitimate points of view based on lived experience. Endtoxicaid (talk) 06:12, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I just feel selling images of patients who have already been abused 9nline to make money throigh fundraising and of photo sales as the Guardian article states is morally reprehensible. They are also still for sale, so it's not inaccurate either Endtoxicaid (talk) 06:14, 14 December 2022 (UTC)
 * thanks Tim, I've never worked for them, given them money or been a patient, so I'm afraid in don't have a conflict on interest from your definition, however I have read professional articles from professional and industry leading websites such as devex.com, Guardian, MSF website, The New Humanitarian and others. Endtoxicaid (talk) 06:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)

Personal attacks
Hello @Endtoxicaid, I don't want to continue the discussion on the Médecins Sans Frontières talk page if it'll result in ad hominem attacks and clog up the page. I'm still not sure you don't have a conflict of interest as another editor pointed out as well, but I'm going to leave it up to the larger community to sort this out. Please thoroughly read through the conflict of interest guidelines posted by @TimSmit and try to maintain objectivity. Kinnayrberes (talk) 08:18, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * @Kinnayrberes great Endtoxicaid (talk) 08:27, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Endtoxicaid: We appreciate your willingness to contribute and help us build a better Wikipedia. After all, we all started as new editors at some point. However, there are a variety of policies, guidelines, and community standards that you should be familiar with. You risk sanctions on your account if you continue to violate policies like the ones I've listed below:
 * WP:NOSHARING: For example, your account's User page states "Who are we? A group of current and ex-aid workers...". However, this Wikipedia policy requires user accounts to represent an individual, not a group. I would recommend deleting your group's account and having everyone in your group review the rest of these policies before creating individual accounts to continue editing.
 * WP:COPYOTHERS: This policy makes it very clear that, as editors of Wikipedia, we must "Never use materials that infringe the copyrights of others" as you did in this edit as well as two of your previous edits. Your actions create legal liabilities that could seriously hurt Wikipedia. They also require other users such as Clovermoss and Sphilbrick to spend time reviewing these edits and deleting each revision which includes blatant copyright violations.
 * WP:COI: Conflict of interest (COI) editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. In a nutshell, this policy says "Do not edit Wikipedia in your own interests, nor in the interests of your external relationships". Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. As your user page states, some of your group's goals are to "deliver justice for people abused by the aid sector" and "Undermine [the ability of the aid sector] to fundraise through tackling their lies on social media". In the future, you can adhere to this policy by voluntarily disclosing your COI before making or requesting any edits.
 * WP:NPOV: All editors must be WP:BALANCED and WP:IMPARTIAL, avoiding WP:SYNTHESIS or original research that makes inferences beyond what is supported by reliable sources. Consider these sentences that were added, with no citations to support the conclusions: "[MSF's response] to these scandals has been considered weak, especially as abusive images remain online for sale, lessons haven't been learned, apologies haven't been appropriately made, compensation paid to survivors and senior management, responsible for overseeing these scandals, followed by a weak response, remain in post. Despite apologising for using explosive images of children, MSF continue to do so, allowing photos to remain on sale on sites such as Getty Images." (end of first paragraph)
 * WP:OVERCITE: A good rule of thumb is to include 1-3 inline citations, based on how likely the given material is to be challenged. It is certainly overkill to add groups of as many as 14 citations, especially within the lead section. For example
 * WP:LEAD: The lead serves as an introduction to the article and a summary of its most important contents. Many times, visitors do not read beyond the lead section, so we need to be especially careful to adhere to Wikipedia policies here. Consider that even if the content you added had been appropriate on its own, it would still need to be placed within the content of the article, not the lead.
 * WP:PA Editors such as Kinnayrberes and PauAmma have pointed out that your responses within the discussion could be construed as personal attacks. We need to avoid personal attacks because they make it more difficult us to work together as editors.
 * These are just some policies that you might find relevant given your recent contributions. Please encourage everyone in your group to review the linked materials and to create their own Wikipedia account before continuing to edit. Thank you. TimSmit (talk) 15:43, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

Adminstrator's Noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Clovermoss 🍀 (talk) 03:11, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

December 2022
 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Orange Mike &#124;  Talk  03:17, 16 December 2022 (UTC)