User talk:Lamws2

October 2022
Hello, I'm Riverbend21. I noticed that you recently removed content from Kazuyo Sejima without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Riverbend21 (talk) 12:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello
 * Sorry I am new to this and didn't realise there was protocol, my apologies.
 * Thank you for setting up Sejima's wikipedia page. I work for Sejima and am modifying the page on her behalf, largely to make corrections to the text ahead of a prize ceremony tomorrow.
 * I would really appreciate it if you could kindly let me make the changes?
 * Many thanks,
 * Lucy Lamws2 (talk) 13:54, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Kazuyo Sejima, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use your sandbox for that. Thank you. XtraJovial (talk • contribs) 13:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add unsourced or poorly sourced content, you may be blocked from editing. -- VViking Talk Edits 13:49, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Edit Warring
Hi Lamws2! I noticed that you have reverted to restore your preferred version of an article several times. The impulse to undo an edit you disagree with is understandable, but I wanted to make sure you're aware that the edit warring policy disallows repeated reversions even if they are justifiable.

All editors are expected to discuss content disputes on article talk pages to try to reach consensus. If you are unable to agree, please use one of the dispute resolution options to seek input from others. Using this approach instead of reverting can help you avoid getting drawn into an edit war. Thank you.-- VViking Talk Edits 13:49, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello
 * Sorry I am new to this and didn't realise there was protocol, my apologies.
 * I work for Sejima and am modifying the page on her behalf, largely to make corrections to the text ahead of a prize ceremony tomorrow.
 * Please could you kindly let me make the changes?
 * Kind regards,
 * Lucy Lamws2 (talk) 13:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for coming to the talk page. Please note you have a Conflict of Interest and therefore should not be editing the article directly. Please use the articles talk page to make suggested changes. You will also want to declare your COI and if you are being paid you may wish to review Paid. -- VViking Talk Edits 13:56, 18 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Please be aware of the following:
 * The subject of a Wikipedia article does not own or control its contents. We have little interest in what the subject wishes to say about themselves; we rely on content sourced to reliable, third-party sources to form the basis for articles.
 * The subject of an article (or their representative) should not be editing it directly, unless it is to remove content that is unmistakably vandalism or libel. Other that that, edit requests on the article talk page should be posted for review by an uninvolved editor.
 * There is no deadline for Wikipedia articles, so we are not beholden to anyone's schedule. While we strive for accuracy, respect for the editing process and the time it requires takes priority over any personal concerns.
 * You should review Wikipedia's plain and simple conflict of interest guide and mandatory paid editing disclosure policy to ensure that your edits are consistent with these expectations.
 * --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 17:19, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. VViking Talk Edits 14:19, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Conflict of interest and paid editing guidelines
Hello, Lamws2. 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 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. Hello Lamws2. 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:Lamws2. 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. Melcous (talk) 14:40, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Lamws2
Hi How goes it? I see your adding into a WP:BLP at Kazuyo Sejima which is cool. But when you add a sentence in or a sentence block, you need to references to that sentence/block. WP:SECONDARY sources are gold standard. Please take a look at WP:REFB which is a small tutorial on how to create a full size sentence. I hope that helps as folk who don't reference don't tend to hang about. I'll post a invitation to the tea house. As you seem to have a WP:COI, best to use the WP:ER mechanism to suggest changes to the article.  scope_creep Talk  16:40, 18 October 2022 (UTC)
 * If you do have a WP:COI, you must declare per WP:DISCLOSE.   scope_creep Talk  16:42, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse
 scope_creep Talk  16:43, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Paid disclosure and edit requests
As you have that you are being paid by Kazuyo Sejima, I have placed the proper paid editing disclosure template on your userpage.

Please note that because you have a conflict of interest, you are defying best practices by continuing to edit the article directly. You really should learn the procedure to make edit requests on the article talk page, and allow an independent editor to review the changes first. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 14:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)