User talk:Mike.gardiner

April 2018
The page Friends Of The Aldershot Military Museum has been deleted, in accordance with Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, for two reasons. I think it also only fair to warn you that even if the article were rewritten from a neutral point of view and without copyright problems, it seems very unlikely that the subject satisfies Wikipedia's notability guidelines, and if not then any article about it, no matter how it might be written, would be likely to be deleted. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:51, 5 April 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) It is almost never suitable to copy content from another web site to Wikipedia, for more than one reason, the most important being copyright. When you post anything to Wikipedia you release it for anyone in the world to reuse it, either unchanged or modified in any way whatever, subject to attribution to Wikipedia. It is very rare that the owner of a web site licenses content for such very free reuse, and in those few occasions when they do so, we require proof of the fact. We don't assume that content is freely licensed on the unsubstantiated say so of just anyone who comes along and creates a Wikipedia account. In this case the copyright statement on the site www.friendsofthealdershotmilitarymuseum.org.uk says "The content of this web site, including the accompanying pictures, may not be reproduced or republished, in whole or in part, either in print or electronically, including on any websites or social media sites, without the prior permission of the author", which seems pretty unambiguous.
 * 2) The content of the page was promotional in tone. Indeed, that is usually so for content about an organisation taken from the web site of that organisation, which is another reason why copying such content is rarely suitable.

If you are connected to someone or something you have written about (a few examples are writing about yourself, your business, your band, a member of your family, your client) then you should be aware that Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline discourages you from writing about that subject. The main reason for that is that experience over the years indicates that editors with such a connection to a subject they are writing about are likely to find it very difficult, or even impossible, to stand back from their writing and see how it will look from the detached perspective of an outsider, so that they are likely to write in ways that look promotional to others, even if they sincerely think they are writing in a neutral way. Also, if your editing forms all or part of work for which you are paid, whether as an employee, as a contractor, or in any other capacity, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require you to state who is paying you, and what your connection to them is. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:53, 5 April 2018 (UTC)