User talk:ManuelaSAparicio

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, ManuelaSAparicio. 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 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. MrOllie (talk) 17:51, 25 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia is not a place to write about your own work or to self promote. - MrOllie (talk) 18:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This is to distribute scientific results on studies, one of the important parts of science! If it was for self promotion I would create a personnal web page. ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 18:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Wikipedia isn't a place to publicise your scientific results. We work with independent, secondary sourcing here - we don't want you to cite your results, we want to cite what other people have written about your results once they have already been widely disseminated. MrOllie (talk) 18:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The papers I cited are widley spread bo ACM digital library. All the papers I cited were independently published, double-blind reviewed, and they are wiedly cited already. ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 18:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * However I can also cite other publications that cited my colleagues and I, as well. I will be doing that. ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 18:33, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Are you here to help us build an encyclopedia, or are you here to add mentions of yourself and/or your colleagues? MrOllie (talk) 18:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * If a contributer can help to build common knowledge about the topics that he/she/other conducts research on, in fits into the wikipedia fundamental principles. Would it change if I had no face at all? Would your assessment change if I was a man? Would you prefer that whta I publish/edit here would not be supported? So many questions in my head right now...
 * Why did you deleted all my contributions, all of them were scientificly supported, all of them complied with the construction of a common knowledge? ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 18:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * A contibutor who is a subject matter expert and who is not here to self-promote is typically familiar with a wide range of sources from diverse authorship and has no need to cite themselves often (or exclusively as in this case). Male academics who act in this fashion are regularly asked to stop as well. MrOllie (talk) 18:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * This is simply strange to the concept that I teach in classes about wikipedia to my students, as a crowdsouced knowledge in th Web which "is not a mere encyclopedia, by instead building a common understaning" (these were the exact words of a hight representative of Wikimedia Foundation in WebSummit 2019.
 * So your common understanding sence, is that you are mediating only what you think is correct? Are you specialist in the area of the articles I edited?
 * Thank you for your time. ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 19:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * The Wikipedia project is happy with building a 'mere eneyclopedia', which is a big enough task all by itself. If you study the subject more, you will find that the Wikimedia Foundation has little to nothing to do with the actual building or maintenance of the encyclopedia itself and frequently does or says things that are out of step with the community that does the work. MrOllie (talk) 19:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * These were the words of the speaker of Wikipedia in Websummit 2019, not my one words. ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 19:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
 * In that sense my intention is not to minimize anyone work, or volunteer work.
 * I will study this in more indepth thank you for your time.
 * Although I feel really disapointed that I lost so much time today here! ManuelaSAparicio (talk) 19:12, 25 April 2022 (UTC)