User talk:Eupraxsophy

November 2018
Hello, I'm ElKevbo. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. ElKevbo (talk) 16:46, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. ElKevbo (talk) 17:40, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello, Eupraxsophy. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. --Hammersoft (talk) 17:23, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

November 2018
You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you insert a spam link. 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.--- Barek (talk • contribs) - 17:58, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Paid editing
Hello Eupraxsophy. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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 akin to Black hat SEO.

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, broadly construed, 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:Eupraxsophy. 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. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. --Hammersoft (talk) 19:41, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

Compensation
Not being compensated in any way for content. Eupraxsophy (talk) 00:12, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * Can you explain why every edit of yours to date has been to promote EupraxBooks books and that your name contains "Euprax"? --Hammersoft (talk) 01:05, 3 November 2018 (UTC)

Conflict?
Hammersoft ... The word eupraxsophy means love of wisdom and knowledge. I took that name because of the author and simply wanted to help, as a friend, include his book as a reference source. I am not being compensated in any way for my efforts. Didn't know I was doing anything wrong. Can you offer any assistance to help do this correctly? E. Eupraxsophy (talk) 16:50, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * If a book is not being used as a source for anything in the text, it should not be added to the list of references. The idea of a citation is that a reader can check that a statement in the text can be verified from an external source - but, the fact that this book is new, inevitably means that it has not been used as a source.   And, if it has not been favourably reviewed by independent sources, there is no need to add it to a list of "Further reading".  Ghmyrtle (talk) 20:52, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
 * And to add on, wanting to help your friend means you have a conflict of interest, which means you really shouldn't be doing it. You've been directed to WP:COI above. I recommend reading through that. Bottom line here is that you are attempting to promote your friend's book. We're not going to accept that here. There is no 'right' way to do that. We are not a means of promotion. --Hammersoft (talk) 23:37, 3 November 2018 (UTC)