User talk:MillieCoutts

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, MillieCoutts. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article UK Mail, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must 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 WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 08:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I am somewhat concerned that you decided, without explanation, to remove a piece of controversy regarding UK Mail. Also, you cannot link images like that, I'm afraid. You need to upload the file. But I would like an explanation for the removal first. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 08:46, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Paid editing notice
Hello MillieCoutts. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to UK Mail. 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. 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, 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:MillieCoutts. 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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 08:49, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Please do not edit until you have responded to this message. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 09:28, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Undisclosed paid editing, 3RR violation and legal threats on UK Mail article. My name is not dave (talk/contribs) 09:13, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

July 2017
Your recent editing history at UK Mail shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. bonadea contributions talk 12:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)


 * All we need from you, is a response and an explanation. It will make the situation much better. If you are unsure how to do this, click 'edit' by where it says 'July 2017'. My name is <small style="color:#4000FF">not <sup style="color:#093">dave (talk/contribs) 12:30, 28 July 2017 (UTC)