User talk:Thatgoodperson

Are you a paid editor with a conflict of interest?
Hello Thatgoodperson. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, and that 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to Black hat SEO.

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, and if it does not, 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:Thatgoodperson. 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, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 13:14, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Greetings, Cwmhiraeth. Thank you for your concern. I declare, in good faith, that I am in no way being compensated for any of my edits, whether directly or indirectly. Neither do I work for any individual or company that has any connection to the pages I edited or plan to edit. Thus, I do not have any undisclosed conflict of interest. All of my edits are done out of my own personal wish. Any pages that I create in the future and the pages I have and will make edits to, do interest me in a positive manner, naturally. As you often have to enjoy what it is you are writing about in order to write about it. But I am also well aware of the rules and practices here on Wikipedia, and I only put information out if it comes from an independent, verified source, and I do cite all of the information I add. Once again, thank you for your concern, but rest assured, there is no reason for it in this case. Keep making this a better community!

Thatgoodperson (talk) 22:23, 7 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Thank you for that statement. Do you know Dimash Adilet personally?


 * I am also concerned by some of the userboxes on your userpage. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:06, 8 December 2018 (UTC)


 * I do not know him personally, neither do I know anyone who knows him personally, but I do follow him on social media for quite some time, and I also have a connection to the country where he is from (Hence why I speak Russian at a very good level). I do have a positive opinion of him, but that would not prevent me from editing his page in a way that is fair from an opinion stand-point and in style of writing. All of the information I put out on his page is fully in line with the nature of the media coverage of his persona, particularly in his home country (if you do a google translate of the sources, you can make sure of it for yourself), where he is very well known, as seen by the 'cult' online following of his. To that extent, I fully follow all the general Wikipedia guidelines, and I try to improve in the areas where I might still be lacking, thus second opinion is always important to me (in this case yours). Also, just to clarify, this is by far not the only person/topic I am interested in creating pages/making edits about, neither it is the only country. But I do like to more or less finish a project, before I can move on to the next one and leave the previous one completely in the hands of the community.


 * I also trust your opinion as an experienced member of this community, and I have, for the moment, only left 2 userboxes on my page (languages). Do let me know if you have any other feedback.

Thatgoodperson (talk) 13:25, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

An extended welcome
Hi Thatgoodperson. Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter. Regardless, editing in a manner that promotes an entity or viewpoint over others can appear to be detrimental to the purpose of Wikipedia and the neutrality required in articles.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 18:09, 15 May 2019 (UTC)