User talk:LynneSaner

Welcome!
Hello, LynneSaner, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Being Aware of Being Aware, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.
 * Article development
 * Standard layout
 * Lead section
 * The perfect article
 * Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type help me on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Iseult  Δx parlez moi 00:59, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Being Aware of Being Aware


A tag has been placed on Being Aware of Being Aware, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly-defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:
 * It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and FAQ/Organizations for more information.
 * It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Iseult  Δx parlez moi 00:59, 3 July 2022 (UTC)

July 2022
Hello LynneSaner. 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:LynneSaner. 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. PRAXIDICAE🌈 01:17, 3 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, I am an hourly paid editor for Rupert Spira, but am NOT being compensated for the contributions to the Wiki. My intent, as would be the case on any Wiki page, is to present the facts with citations, nothing more. Now there is a paid undisclosed warning on Rupert Spira's Wiki page, which I did not create, but edited. How can this be remedied. I AM NOT BEING PAID! Thanks, Lynne LynneSaner (talk) 14:44, 3 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You have a direct and serious conflict of interest and you're paid to work for him, so either way you need to disclose and only request changes on the talk page. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:52, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Good lord, I've just updated the page with nothing but facts and citations. I AM NOT BEING PAID FOR THIS WORK! LynneSaner (talk) 15:56, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * WP:COI - read it and disclose. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:57, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Why is the 'This article may have been created or edited in return for undisclosed payments, a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use. It may require cleanup to comply with Wikipedia's content policies, particularly neutral point of view. (July 2022)' on RS's wiki page if you have removed my edits. Please advice how to have it removed.  LynneSaner (talk) 16:00, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * You are for most purposes considered paid but in any case, you have a conflict of interest which requires disclosure. I'm not going to argue with you about the tedium of words. Do a proper disclosure, request changes with reliable, independent sources on the talk page - and written neutrally, and it'll be removed. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:01, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Please remove it and I will no longer attempt to make edits. I'm done with any attempt to update his page. We'll let others do it, as they will. LynneSaner (talk) 16:03, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * It doesn't change the fact that for months on end there has been promotional paid and COI editing. So, no. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:04, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * That's absurd. I 'played' with his page about two months ago to familiarize myself with the process and only went back to it a couple of weeks ago (to update the intro and life sections) when you flagged me and stopped the process. It's not worth it. I'm done. LynneSaner (talk) 16:07, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Praxidicae, if I were to make edits to it, at this point, you would obviously be alerted immediately, but I will delete my wiki account. I have no problem with that. Please just remove that warning as literally nothing on the current page has anything that I updated. I am a writer and it bothered me his page was so out of date and inaccurate, so I created a wiki account to update it accurately. Obviously, I wasn't in a rush to do it. I wasn't on a paid timeline to do it. No one in the organization asked me to do it. No one is expecting me to do it. I simply wanted to update the page to more accurately reflect his life. If you look at what I added, I think you'll see that it was true. There was nothing nefarious here. I didn't try to hide my identity as his consulting editor. And obviously, I didn't know what I was getting myself into. So please, just delete that thing. I will delete my wiki account. And the clock has been turned back a month or two. Thanks, Lynne LynneSaner (talk) 16:30, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Can you at least tell me how long the flag will up. A month? A year? Forever? LynneSaner (talk) 18:19, 6 July 2022 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello, LynneSaner. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Rupert Spira, 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. – Athaenara ✉  01:26, 3 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Hello, I had attempted to update Rupert Spira's wiki page. I admit, I had no idea what I was getting into. It's been quite the shitshow. My bad for my wiki-ignorance. That said, Praxidicae has removed ALL edits that I made (despite the fact that they are simply factual updates) and yet there is an undisclosed paid flag on the page. I am not being paid for any of this work. Praxidicae is not responding to my request. Is there another route I can take to get the undisclosed paid flag removed. I want nothing more than to be done with editing this, or any other, wiki page, but I think it is reasonable to request that given none of my edits are presented on the page that the flag is inaccurate and unfair.
 * Thanks in advance for your help. Lynne LynneSaner (talk) 18:40, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi there, may I request a response? LynneSaner (talk) 12:05, 7 July 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I am requesting that a warning for paid work be removed from Rupert Spira's wiki page. I have told the editor who flagged the page that I am unpaid by Rupert Spira for this task, though I edit his books and written material otherwise. I did not try to hide this and obviously didn't know what I was getting into when I LynneSaner (talk) 12:23, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * attempted to update his very out of date page. I no longer have any interest in attempting this -- the barrier is too high -- but would request that the warning be taken down given that nothing that I edited is currently displaying on the page, but was removed by PRAXIDICAE🌈. All I am requesting is that it be returned to the condition it was in before I updated it (with nothing but facts, btw). Thank you. Lynne LynneSaner (talk) 12:25, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Once this is done, I will happily 'retire' my wiki account. LynneSaner (talk) 12:26, 7 July 2022 (UTC)


 * Whether you retire from Wikipedia is your decision. I see no reason to remove the tag at this time; even if you are not being paid(and I think there is reason to think you are) looking at the edit history it's possible others were. The tag will be removed when an independent editor has reviewed the content. There is no deadline for this, but it will happen. 331dot (talk) 14:57, 7 July 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for letting me know the process and timeline, or lack of one. I assure you, as I have others, that I am not being paid for any work I have done with respect to RS's wiki page. It has been entirely on my own time. I have admitted to -- and clearly never tried to hide -- my association with RS as a consulting editor. I would have used a different username and email address if that had been the case. I wish now that I had, but I value transparency. I simply saw an out-of-date wiki and wanted to correct it. Admittedly I approached this task with a fair amount of naivete, but the ensuing communications and feedback from PRAXIDICAE🌈 have been aggressive and inflexible, operating solely from the assumption that my edits were nefarious in nature. When an editor reviews them, I'm confident they will find that nothing but facts were shared and that it was an improvement on what was there. I had looked forward to learning through this process and then continuing on as an editor in those areas that interested me. Alas.
 * Thanks for your time. Lynne LynneSaner (talk) 16:46, 7 July 2022 (UTC)