User talk:PlanetreePCC

Planetree
Please stop attempting to add advertising copy to the Planetree article. I have corrected the incorrect information in the article and reduced it to text free of positivist buzzwords. Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia; you are welcome to add cited factual information, but there is an important difference between neutral text and promotional text. Before you make any more edits, you should read Conflict of interest, as it appears relevant given your username. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 02:11, 24 July 2013 (UTC)


 * OK. I will definitely review the conflict of interest information. I thought I was describing what our organization does and did not feel it was promotional. Do you work for Wikipedia?


 * I do not work for Wikipedia; only about 130 editors on the English Wikipedia work for the Wikimedia Foundation, and all of them explicitly identify themselves as such. I'm merely an editor who happens to keep watch over a lot of New England-area articles out of personal interest, as many longer-term editors tend to do. I've, uh, been around the block a couple times.


 * When I say promotional, I mean such wording as "focused on excellence", "have borne out their needs and desires for a more personalized, humanized and demystified health care experience", "partnering with providers across the continuum of care to transform organizational cultures", and "putting the needs of individuals first", which are all phrased to represent a positive view of Planetree. Whether they are true or not - something I am not qualified to comment on - they are not empirically verifiable, not do they represent the neutral and dispassionate tone and factual information that makes Wikipedia an encyclopedia. "Focused on excellence", for example, sounds great in ad copy but actually means absolutely nothing - is there any care organization that's "focused on being okay most days, we guess"?


 * Given that Planetree is a nonprofit group I am largely not suspicious of your motives, whereas similar activity from someone representing a for-profit is usually considered spam. (The difference is that you presumably don't stand to make money off stock options nor increased website traffic, and thus your edits aren't colored by financial motive.) However, given that you apparently are representing your organization (you should be aware that your username is a borderline policy no-no, but since you're editing thus far in good faith the most that would happen is you being asked to change your username) it is assumed (by community consensus, not merely my personal bias) that your ability to write neutrally about your employer is compromised. This doesn't reflect badly on you; it's merely a normal conflict of interest.


 * PS: On talk pages, it's considered best practice to add ~ (four tildes) after your comment. This automatically signs it as being from you. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 15:23, 24 July 2013 (UTC)