User talk:Mathieuks

February 2020
Hello Mathieuks. 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Mathieuks. 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. Yunshui 雲 水 13:21, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

Re: undisclosed financial stake ?
Hi ! Thanks for your message. I am not receiving or expecting to receive compensation for my edits, but I understand the confusion. Indeed I work for PrestaShop, which is the topic of the pages I have edited, but my position is not related to promoting the company. Actually I am a developer working there ! I work in the code, not on the company image or media content. Some weeks ago, I was browsing Wikipedia and thought it could be fun to check my employer's Wikipedia pages. I saw it was quite small and outdated and I thought I could make it more complete. Since this time, User:Emufarmers told me it would be better not to edit PrestaShop Wikipedia pages anymore as it is a conflict of interest. Indeed he is right, which is why I will not edit PrestaShop wikipedia pages anymore in order to meet Wikipedia goal of neutrality.

I hope I cleared the misunderstanding.

I have a small question though: also indeed it's better that PrestaShop employees, be it marketing folks or HR or developers, do not edit the page, how could we at least suggest edits to provide more accurate data ? For example if we release a new version of the software, can we edit the page in order to make the informations more accurate ("new version is X instead of Z"), obviously while providing valid sources ?

Have a nice day, Mathieuks (talk) 21:35, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
 * Users in your position should not edit the article about their employer directly, but should instead use the requested edit process to ask for changes to be made by unaffiliated editors. You can edit other pages which do not relate directly to your company as you wish, but edits in an area where you have a conflict of interest are likely to result in your account being blocked. Yunshui 雲 水 23:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)