User talk:Southernmoss

When to mark an edit as minor
Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Islamic terrorism, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Bondegezou (talk) 10:31, 21 January 2019 (UTC)

January 2019
Hello, Southernmoss. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page multiple, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.
 * It appears that all of your edits are to add papers by the same authors and that you are likely one of them. O3000 (talk) 12:51, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Possible citation spam
Hello, Southernmoss. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to research published by a small group of researchers.

Scientific articles should mainly reference review articles to ensure that the information added is trusted by the scientific community.

Editing in this way is also a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest in Wikipedia – please see WP:SELFCITE and WP:MEDCOI. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM) and the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.

Finally, please be aware that the editing community highly values expert contributors – please see WP:EXPERT. I do hope you will consider contributing more broadly. If you wish to contribute, please first consider citing review articles written by other researchers in your field and which are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite your own research, please start a new thread on the article talk page and add requestedit to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added.

Like above, I too have noticed that you have been adding citations by Simon Moss to multiple articles. In addition to reviewing the conflict of interest guidelines mentioned above, please also review the Wikipedia guideline on citation spamming, or "adding references with the aim of promoting the author or the work being referenced": "Citation spamming is the illegitimate or improper use of citations, footnotes or references. Citation spamming is a form of search engine optimization or promotion that typically involves the repeated insertion of a particular citation or reference in multiple articles by a single contributor. Often these are added not to verify article content but rather to populate numerous articles with a particular citation. Variations of citation spamming include academics and scientists using their editing privileges primarily to add citations to their own work..."

In summary: If you are adding references to your own publications to multiple articles, please stop. Biogeographist (talk) 15:48, 26 January 2019 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. O3000 (talk) 17:20, 26 January 2019 (UTC)
 * Please respond to the questions raised and stopped spamming references to the work of Simon Moss. If you genuinely think there is content that has value for the encyclopedia and not just to promote his work, then you should propose its addition on the talk page of the relevant article, but do not just keep adding the same kind of content, or you will likely face being blocked from editing here. Melcous (talk) 08:17, 27 January 2019 (UTC)