User talk:RJFReview

February 2014
Hello, RJFReview. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * 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.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. ElKevbo (talk) 02:14, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

Connection with The Princeton Review?
Do you have a connection with The Princeton Review? ElKevbo (talk) 22:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi ELKevbo,
 * I do have a connection. That said, I tried to follow Wikipedia's guidance that you cited above to the letter and avoid marketing text and any deletions. I tried to give citations for everything I added but see that I cited many of those to The Princeton Review's site instead of outside sources.   I will change those citations directly.  I likely won't be able to do it tonight but I will do so tomorrow.   Apologies for my overstep there. RJFReview (talk) 23:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Do you work for them? ElKevbo (talk) 00:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * ELkevbo, I corrected the citations promised in my last message.  Please let me know if these edits meet the neutral editorial Wikipedia guidance. RJFReview (talk) 00:23, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * If you do work for the company, you must abide by our policies about paid editing and that includes clearly disclosing your paid relationship with the subject. If you otherwise have a close relationship with the company, you are strongly advised to not edit its article(s) directly but to limit your interactions with it to requests and suggestions in Talk. ElKevbo (talk) 00:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)