User talk:HeidiHollis

Conflict of interest
Hi there. I saw that you added some information about Heidi Hollis to Shadow person. The problem is that you may be Heidi Hollis herself. The reason why Wikipedia generally disapproves of this is because it's difficult to write about yourself neutrally, and maintaining a neutral point of view is one of the cornerstones of Wikipedia. Without meaning to, it's easy for one to slip into a rather promotional form of writing, such as highlighting one's accomplishments or adding irrelevant details about oneself to tangentially related topics. Our guideline on how to manage a conflict of interest advises editors to let others write about you. The best way to deal with this is to suggest changes on the talk page. Then, if editors without a COI find the information pertinent, they will add it to the article. I realize this is very bureaucratic, but conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia has become a big problem, and there are many editors here who have taken a hardline stance on the issue. It's best to err on the side of caution when you write about yourself. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 07:43, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

January 2016
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be engaged in an edit war with one or more editors according to your reverts at Shadow person. Although repeatedly reverting or undoing another editor's contributions may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, and often creates animosity between editors. Instead of edit warring, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose editing privileges. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a loss of editing privileges. Thank you. Dr.  K.  03:36, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Your addition to Shadow person has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. ''Please do not restore the picture because it has a watermark with a copyright notice. If the picture is yours you must take certain steps to prove that you are indeed the artist who created that picture. Until such time please do not restore it in the article. '' Dr.   K.  05:07, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Shadow person. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Per WP:COI above, you should not write about yourself in Wikipedia articles. McGeddon (talk) 10:46, 12 January 2016 (UTC)


 * You clearly have a conflict of interest here. As a best practice, one should never link, describe, or otherwise promote one's own works in Wikipedia articles. Please read Conflict of interest for further guidance. In the interest in complying with the policy Neutral point of view, if you want to add or change content relating to you or your work, please use the article's talk page to propose your change, rather than making the change directly. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:29, 12 January 2016 (UTC)