User talk:HistoryEditor2021

January 2021
Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at National Guard Bureau. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted. Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges.  Added note: once you've been reverted, then per wp:BRD, go to the article talk page (not other editor's user talk pages) and discuss your edits there, before trying to re-add them. -  wolf  18:39, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
 * If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.
 * I'm so sorry for causing issues, particularly for the reversion; this is my first Wikipedia revision and I wasn't aware of the disruptive editing policy. Could you please explain what part of my edits are being deemed unconstructive? I'm happy to make whatever changes I need to in order to make them constructive, but I haven't received any concrete examples of what exactly is wrong so I can fix it. HistoryEditor2021 (talk) 18:57, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I wasn't the first editor to revert you (if that was you posting with an IP user account, prior to using this account), and this is not the place to discuss the merits of those edits. You need to go to the article talk page and and discuss it there. I will however point out that it appears some of the content you tried to add to that page appears to be copied from other sources. I would strongly encourage you to read Wikipedia's copyright policies, as violations are treated quite seriously. - wolf  19:09, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * Okay thanks for the info. As I'm getting more familiar with the copyright policy, could you point out the content you're specifically referencing that appears to be copied from other sources? I either wrote the copy myself or cited my sources I want to make sure I'm following everything and can actually fix it HistoryEditor2021 (talk) 19:15, 7 January 2021 (UTC)
 * I just searched with some random lengthy selections from your edit and several came back word-for-word. So whether you posted content from your own already published source or just made some errors, the onus is on you to go through your entire proposed edit to ensure all of it is in compliance with all WP policy, before you try adding it to Wikipedia. That's about all I can tell you, for any further assistance, try contacting the Help Desk. - wolf  20:50, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

February 2021
Hello HistoryEditor2021. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:HistoryEditor2021. 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, do not edit further until you answer this message. 331dot (talk) 14:58, 3 February 2021 (UTC)