User talk:TGL321

February 2024
Hello TGL321. The nature of your edits 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 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 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:TGL321. 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. Seraphimblade Talk to me 05:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello, I am sorry to cause any confusion but I have no conflict of interest. I would be more then happy to talk through any of the edits I made and respond to any questions you might have. TGL321 (talk) 14:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * i am a college student and had to do a marketing project on this company. When I went to Wikipedia (which always do before all my projects to get a big picture), I was surprised at how inaccurate and sparse the information was on the site. Just off the bat, the year it was founded was wrong, the list of senior employees were wrong and all the philanthropy stuff was pretty sparse. I filled in sections because it was part of my report last semester and I used all those citations. - then it got interesting and I did more searches yesterday. I am not getting paid anything unfortunately! But I do love Wikipedia, it’s an important help for my first steps at school and I do assume it’s accurate when I do! You should check my citations, they are definitely right - bkz I had to hand them in! TGL321 (talk) 14:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Just trying to be helpful, but if you check my IP or would like a student id it would show where I am at TGL321 (talk) 15:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I am not a checkuser, and don't need or want to know your actual identity. What you're saying makes sense, so I'll take your word for it. That said, I'm afraid that is not going to work out. Wikipedia articles are required to be written in a neutral way, and advertising and marketing are not permitted, so this "assignment" is likely to end in frustration both for the students and the volunteers here. We do have a specific program which works with teachers to design appropriate student work for Wikipedia, and also provides resources to students taking such classes. I think your teacher may benefit from getting in contact with them, as right now they seem not to understand what the project is for. Now of course, if there is something which is factually inaccurate, that we'd of course want to see fixed&mdash;but maybe start there, and leave out all the fluffy "philanthropy" stuff and the like. If independent sources haven't confirmed that those are actually something significant, it probably doesn't bear mention in the article either, and even if it does anything about it should be worded in a neutral tone, just sticking to verifiable facts. Seraphimblade Talk to me 17:54, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks a lot! Ill make sure that anything that I post in the future has a more neutral tone, and only has the facts. TGL321 (talk) 18:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)