User talk:Lucky Jim Carpenter

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia
Hi Lucky Jim Carpenter. Would you please explain the nature of your relationship with Christina Krüsi and Gudrun Ruttkowski, that you mentioned here? You can reply here - I will see it. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 03:54, 17 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Jytog,


 * No problem. I'm a freelance writer and editor in the US. Having heard of me through mutual publishing contacts, Christina Krüsi hired me a few years ago to revise the English translation of her book ("Paradies war meine Hölle"), and has since engaged me a few times to edit copy for her and help her with English versions of her art publications.


 * A few weeks ago, she and Gudrun Ruttkowski reached out via email to ask for my help with writing a new section of Christina's Wikipedia page, dealing with her art career. She has wanted her Wikipedia page to better reflect her art career, and not just her controversial life story, since she began working full-time as an artist; her specific reason for doing it now is that she's traveling to New York this week for ArtExpo, and expects to meet new people in the art community there who will want to read about this part of her life.


 * Christina, Gudrun and I spoke via Skype and compiled notes via email and Dropbox for the new section; both of them have approved (via email) everything I wrote and posted. Knowing that her Wikipedia page in particular has attracted a lot of trolling and controversy in the past, I advised Christina to post the new copy herself, but she's been too busy preparing for ArtExpo to re-familiarize herself with Wikipedia's editing protocol (and also seems not to have her original Wikipedia login information anymore!). If there are any points I can clarify, or re-word for better compliance, please let me know and I'll be happy to!


 * Regards, James — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lucky Jim Carpenter (talk • contribs) 21:07, 19 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks for replying!  Quick note on the logistics of discussing things on Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting (see WP:THREAD) - when you reply to someone, you put a colon in front of your comment, which the Wikipedia software will render into an indent when you save your edit; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons in front of your comment, which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this  in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread.  I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages when you save your edit.  That is how we know who said what to whom and when.


 * Please be aware that threading and signing are fundamental etiquette here, as basic as "please" and "thank you", and continually failing to thread and sign communicates rudeness, and eventually people may start to ignore you (see here).


 * I know this is insanely archaic and unwieldy, but this is the software environment we have to work on. Sorry about that. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog (talk) 22:15, 19 April 2018 (UTC)


 * Thanks again for replying. Would you please clarify if you are being paid, or expect to be paid, for this editing?  It doesn't change the conflict of interest issue - we just use different templates to describe what is going on. Once you reply, I can provide you with guidance about conflict of interest in Wikipedia and then some general orientation about editing. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 22:17, 19 April 2018 (UTC)


 * No. I have been paid for other writing and editing I’ve done for Christina, on the basis of which she reached out to me about making this edit, but this edit is not paid, nor was it directed by her. I don't know if it's relevant here, but to be clear: when we spoke, Christina only told me she wanted information about her art career to be added as a supplement to the rest of the page; the content was mine to determine, given my previous working familiarity with her art and life. I did run the edit by her and Gudrun to confirm that my statements and citations were accurate, but I tried to be neutral in the substance of what I wrote. That said, does the specific conflict of interest in this case lie in the fact that this is information that Christina herself wished to be part of the page? Thanks for your help with this...Lucky Jim Carpenter (talk) 16:59, 20 April 2018 (UTC)