User talk:Finguerres

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, PatenHughes. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Paten Hughes, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:35, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Hello PatenHughes. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Paten Hughes. 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:PatenHughes. 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. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:35, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:PatenHughes, and the template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:41, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

I, the author, am not receiving any compensation whatsoever for this work PatenHughes (talk) 04:44, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 04:51, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

The username was created only to reference the source material. It is not an attempt to pose as another individual. Will gladly change username. There is no COI. PatenHughes (talk) 04:55, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Paten Hughes


The article Paten Hughes has been proposed for deletion because it appears to have no references. Under Wikipedia policy, this biography of a living person will be deleted after seven days unless it has at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the prod blp/dated tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within seven days, the article may be deleted, but you can when you are ready to add one. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:02, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

About your username
Welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. This is a message to let you know that your username, "PatenHughes", may not comply with Wikipedia's username policy. Please note that the following types of usernames are prohibited:
 * Promotional usernames: Those which match the name of a company, organization, group, website or product (e.g. "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", "Foobar Museum of Art"). However, you are allowed to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you personally (e.g. "Jack Smith at XYZ Company", "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "FoobarFan87").
 * Usernames implying shared use: Those which directly imply shared access between people (e.g. "Jack and Jill's Account"), or match names of posts within groups or organizations (e.g. "Secretary of the XY Foundation").
 * Misleading usernames: Those which contain suffixes like "bot" or "script" and imply an account is that of an automated bot when it is not, or titles like "admin" or "sysop" (implying a position of authority), or match names of living people that you are not, such as famous living people. If you are a famous person editing under your real name and your account is blocked from editing, please note that this is not to discourage you from editing, but rather to prevent any potentially damaging impersonation of you.
 * Offensive usernames: Those which contain words or phrases that are likely to offend other contributors, directly threaten or attack another person or some entity, or contain contentious material about living persons.
 * Disruptive usernames: Those which otherwise imply you do not intend to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia (e.g. "WannabeWikipediaVandal").

For more information, see Wikipedia's username policy.

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people, and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, website, person or other entity, nor do we tolerate any other 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior, regardless of your username. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. As an alternative, you may ask for a change of username by completing this form, or you may simply create a new account for editing. Thank you. - Bri (talk) 06:56, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Finguerres, you are invited to the Teahouse!

 * Simply bypassing an article to a different space is not an assurance it will be accepted there and thus the new one is nominated for deletion, since all pages are examined and the current existing one now has no claims of meeting the same criteria at the first, also because it still has promotional concerns. Also, if applicable, see our non-negotiable policy WP:Paid. SwisterTwister   talk  19:50, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Nomination of Paten Hughes for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Paten Hughes is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Paten Hughes until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. John Nagle (talk) 03:55, 1 April 2017 (UTC)