User talk:Thehappyworkaholic

Welcome!
Hello, Thehappyworkaholic, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to Richard Borer does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV). Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Below are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!  Julietdeltalima   (talk)  17:06, 9 August 2018 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

This is an encyclopedia, not a networking platform
Please do not add content to the encyclopedia again like you just did to Richard Borer. Have you actually read any Wikipedia articles? Do you realize that this is not what they look like or the kind of information they contain? This isn't a social media site or networking platform; it is for articles about individuals of encyclopedic notability and should not include resume-type information. Please also read WP:COI and comply with the instructions set forth therein. If you have any questions I suggest you ask the editors at WP:TEAHOUSE for an objective second opinion that will also likely be quicker than mine. -  Julietdeltalima   (talk)  17:09, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

I was not aware of more guidelines. I just updated as getting paid. Is this correct? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Thehappyworkaholic

August 2018
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Richard Borer. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you.  Julietdeltalima   (talk)  17:48, 9 August 2018 (UTC)

August 2018
Please stop removing maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Richard Borer, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 17:38, 14 August 2018 (UTC)

I did resolve the problem. Please advise on more details.
 * As a paid editor you are very strongly advised NOT to edit the Richard Borer page directly, but only make suggestions on the article's talk page, thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 15:41, 6 September 2018 (UTC)


 * I am no longer active on Richard Borer page. Is it possible to remove template warnings. I would truly appreciate it!

Thehappyworkaholic (talk) 22:19, 29 September 2018 (UTC)

September 2018
Please stop adding unsourced content, as you did on Richard Borer. This violates Wikipedia's policy on verifiability. If you continue to do so, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 15:56, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Thehappyworkaholic. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Richard Borer, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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 COI 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. Theroadislong (talk) 16:34, 6 September 2018 (UTC)

Final warning
After reviewing your activity at Richard Borer, it has been entirely inappropriate. This is your final warning that should any further issues occur, you will be blocked from editing altogether.

While paid editing is tolerated on Wikipedia, it is only just tolerated. It is not generally liked or encouraged. The expectation is that paid editors will conduct themselves impeccably and not be a drain on volunteer time. You have not at all been doing this. It is your responsibility to research and understand our rules and policies, rather than asking other editors to spoon feed them to you. It is your responsibility to ensure you follow them, rather than expecting other editors to prompt and correct you when you fail to. It is your responsibility to completely understand what you are doing and what you need to do.

Thus far, you have violated our policies on neutrality (by attempting to put a bunch of CV fluff into an article), edit warring (by doing that again), paid editing (by disclosing only when prompted), conflict of interest editing (by editing an article directly where you had a COI rather than making talk page suggestions), and forum shopping (by asking the same question in a different place when you didn't like the first answer). The expectation is that you would have known of, and followed, these policies.

You have also been substantially aggressive. Put up an edit request (that's one edit request at a time, not the multiple sections you have up now), and then wait for uninvolved editors to get around to reviewing it. The process is not necessarily fast. If it's not, that doesn't mean "go bother someone on their talk page", it means to wait. Paid editors are also expected not to be overly aggressive, and to take "no" for an answer if that's what the answer is.

I hope that this is enough information to allow you to correct your approach, because as I hope to make clear, this is an absolute final warning. Don't add more talk page sections until all the previous ones are addressed. Don't add more than one on a subject. Don't try to rush things, and above all, slow down and make sure you're doing things correctly. Seraphimblade Talk to me 01:50, 7 September 2018 (UTC)