User talk:Rhonda Lidgold

February 2021
Hello, Rhonda Lidgold, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Lord Belbury (talk) 16:48, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello Rhonda Lidgold. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Rachel Parris, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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, broadly construed, 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:Rhonda Lidgold. 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. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. — Jeff G. ツ 09:04, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Rachel Parris photos
Can you clarify whether you're a fan who's trying to improve Rachel Parris's article using photos you've found online, or someone who's acting on behalf of Rachel (either professionally or as a favour) to update her article? Thanks. --Lord Belbury (talk) 16:50, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
 * Hi Rhonda Lidgold. Another user,, described the issues with your attempt to upload the image of Parris as follows: Copyright initially vests in the author (photographer), not the mere subject (Parris). Accordingly, acting under Parris' direction, even if true, is entirely meaningless with respect to copyright. We would require COM:OTRS evidence of the document that transferred rights from the photographer to Parris and that Lidgold is Parris' agent. That abbreviation "COM:OTRS" is shorthand for the name of a volunteer response team who you can email at info-en-o@wikimedia.org; or, better yet, there is a more streamlined process to contact the team and release an image at https://relgen.toolforge.org/. Make sure you have read and understood that you need documentation of the rights being transferred from the photographer to Parris. If you're the same person as , who has been making very similar actions related to Rachel Parris, then please stick to one account. If you are confused then you need to ask questions rather than continuing to carry out the same actions over and over again. — Bilorv ( talk ) 22:29, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

I am acting on behalf of Rachel Parris. I work for her talent agent - Sophie Chapman and she has asked us to update her photo. We own the rights to the photos I have tried to upload.
 * you need to prove this via https://relgen.toolforge.org/. Otherwise, you must understand, this is the wild west of the internet and anyone can (and does) claim to be anyone. You need to give documented evidence of holding copyright as explained above. Otherwise this puts us at risk of violating copyright law. You may be blocked if you continue to re-add the image to the article directly. If you release the appropriate evidence to the volunteer response team then we will be happy to use any new photos in the article and I'll be happy to add them for you—that's a win-win, because we want to be using an up-to-date image too. But I said it before and I'll repeat myself: if you are confused then you need to ask questions rather than continuing to carry out the same actions over and over again. — Bilorv ( talk ) 22:54, 8 February 2021 (UTC)