User talk:PippaN

Comment moved from User:PippaN
I am removing your edit of the Political Scientist stub template. This edit was causing all political scientist stub articles to have Pippa Norris's information under their article.--Modernhiawatha 01:40, 22 February 2006 (UTC)

License tagging for Image:Pippa Norris in 2004.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Pippa Norris in 2004.jpg. Wikipedia gets thousands of images uploaded every day, and in order to verify that the images can be legally used on Wikipedia, the source and copyright status must be indicated. Images need to have an image tag applied to the image description page indicating the copyright status of the image. This uniform and easy-to-understand method of indicating the license status allows potential re-users of the images to know what they are allowed to do with the images.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. If you need help on selecting a tag to use, or in adding the tag to the image description, feel free to post a message at Media copyright questions. 20:09, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

Your submission at AfC Electoral integrity was accepted
 Electoral integrity, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created. The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article. You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. . Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia! Alanl (talk) 09:21, 12 January 2014 (UTC)
 * If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
 * If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, PippaN. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Pippa Norris‎, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Using an account doesn't solve the problems. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:30, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:31, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Your sources
All the sources you are adding are primary sources- Wikipedia wants secondary sources about you, not just things you've written. Also, you are strongly encouraged not to directly edit, as the page is so promotional, I'm very tempted to put it up for deletion. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:37, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Pippa Norris for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Pippa Norris is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Pippa Norris until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Joseph2302 (talk) 21:38, 27 May 2015 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia
Hi Pippa. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia.

Although you were provided with formal notice of our COI guideline above, you have been extensively editing the article about yourself. Perhaps a bit more discussion....

Wikipedia highly values contributions by subject matter experts; at the same time, experts have some special challenges when they first start editing here. Please see the essay with advice for experts, WP:EXPERTS, which discusses both sides of that coin.

One of the challenges is related to conflicts of interest (COI). I reckon you are very familiar with that concept from your academic work, but it has some interesting twists here in Wikipedia, since we allow editors to be anonymous here, and editors directly publish their edits, with no mediation (no publisher, no peer review - just direct publication)   Please do read WP:COI, especially the section on Writing about yourself and your work.

Wikipedia is a scholarly project, and like all scholarly endeavors, managing COI is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review.

You are editing under your own name, so disclosure is pretty much done.

Peer review step. What we ask editors with a COI to do, is offer suggestions on the Talk page for others to review instead of directly editing the article. Going forward, please do not directly edit articles where you have a COI, but rather offer suggestions at the article's Talk page. You can do that easily - and provide notice to the community of your request -  by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. There is a section at the bottom of the mustard-colored box at the top of the Talk page - there is a link at "click here" in that section. If you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request. Would you please do that going forward?

Please let me know if you are willing to do that. I am happy to talk, if you have any questions or want to discuss anything, you can write them below. I will see them, as I am "watching" this page. Best regards, Jytdog (talk) 02:10, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
 * Would you please reply here? Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 23:11, 11 August 2018 (UTC)