User talk:Since1728

Welcome!
Hi Since1728! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay. I also noticed that your user name and edits are connected to the University of Nottingham, so I have posted a standard notice below.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! TSventon (talk) 14:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

University of Nottingham Ningbo China
Hello Since1728. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to University of Nottingham Ningbo China, 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:Since1728. 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. TSventon (talk) 14:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello TSventon,

I am new to Wikipedia. I have documented my changes with sources. Regarding the conflict of interest allegation: I have not received any money or similar rewards, for making changes to the page.

Best regards

Since1728


 * 1. Thank you for your answer. You have chosen a username linked to the University of Nottingham, so please can you also confirm whether you work for the university or have another conflict of interest related to it. If you do have a conflict of interest, WP:COI strongly recommends that you do not edit affected articles directly.
 * 2. As you are a new user, I would recommend reviewing the Learn more about editing link on the welcome message at the start of this page.
 * 3. I have had a look at your two edits, the first added some references, but I am not sure that they are all reliable, see WP:RS. Another editor changed the lead again so I have restored the previous version.
 * 4.The second edit removed some templates, which I have added back because you did not explain why they are no longer needed.
 * By the way, please sign your posts with four tildes ~, then you can notify another editor by using the ping template as I did here. TSventon (talk) 11:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Since1728 (talk) 16:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Hello TSventon,

– 1. You have chosen a username linked to the University of Nottingham, so please can you also confirm whether you work for the university or have another conflict of interest related to it. If you do have a conflict of interest, WP:COI strongly recommends that you do not edit affected articles directly.

Answer: Why is my username linked to the University of Nottingham? The date is independent of the article: Foundation of the University (1881) China campus (2004) my name is since1718. Therefore, where do you make the connection? Please provide evidence to support your assertion.

– 2. As you are a new user, I would recommend reviewing the Learn more about editing link on the welcome message at the start of this page.

Answer: Thank you, will do. I am very interested in the learning process.

- 3. I have had a look at your two edits, the first added some references, but I am not sure that they are all reliable, see WP:RS. Another editor changed the lead again so I have restored the previous version.

Answer: Could you please indicate why you think the references are wrong? Furthermore, what is wrong with inserting the university logo? As for other universities, I believe this is part of a complete Wikipedia page.

- 4. The second edit removed some templates, which I have added back because you did not explain why they are no longer needed.

Answer: I found sources at the places "citation necessary" and inserted them. This was in the removed template as a main task. My mistake was not to comment the change. I will keep this in mind in the future.

Best regards


 * You may wonder what is my interest in University of Nottingham Ningbo China. I saw a Did you know nomination for Xu Yafen and put UNNC on my watchlist due to its multiple templates and history of edit warring. I have numbered my original paragraphs for clarity.
 * 1. My mistake, I somehow misread Since1728 as Since1798, when an adult education school was founded according to the university article. Could you answer the question about whether you have a conflict of interest anyway?
 * 3. References should be based on reliable sources as explained in Reliable sources. Scholarship and quality news organisations can be good sources. The sources you added were
 * staffordglobal.org Nottingham's partner in Singapore, so not independent. The qaa report explains "Chinese law requires that a UK university must work in cooperation with a legitimate Chinese partner". A TES report, of which I can only access the headline, suggests that it is misleading to regard UNNC as simply a Nottingham campus.


 * greatwall.co.id and sicas.cn seem to be student recruitment sites, not obviously as reliable as scholarship or quality news. Greatwall seems to be identical with part of the Wikipedia article. The article developed over time, suggesting Greatwall copied Wikipedia, so it can't be used as a source.
 * qaa.ac.uk reliable primary source
 * You added the university coat of arms, not the castle logo which is used on the UNNC website.
 * 4. It is always good to explain your edits. I could have understood removing the citations template, but you also removed templates for promotion, puffery (similar to promotion) and self-published sources. Most references are sourced to the university rather than coming for independent reliable sources, so the self-published sources template is justified, and self-published sources tend to be promotional. TSventon (talk) 22:34, 19 January 2022 (UTC)

Since1728 (talk) 21:24, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

Hello TSventon,

I do not profit directly or indirectly if I edit the article. However, if you ask me about my motives, many educational institutions in China (or Asia) do not receive the same attention from authors as others.

I will look for independent sources in the next few weeks so that the template message can disappear. One question about this: How can I see how many self-published sources are needed or where too much of them have been applied?

Kind regards