User talk:Triplesense Reply

Welcome!
Welcome!

Hello, Triplesense Reply, and welcome to Wikipedia! I have noticed that you are fairly new! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. I also see that some of your recent edits show an interest in the use of images and/or photos on Wikipedia.

Did you know that ...
 * ...Wikipedia has a very stringent image use policy?
 * ...most images from Flickr, online news websites, and other web sources are copyrighted?
 * ...Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously?
 * ...freely-licensed images should be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, a central location for images where they can be used on all Wikipedia projects?
 * ...we recommend that new users use our "files for upload" process - at least until you get the hang of things?

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, you can just type  on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here 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! Marchjuly (talk) 13:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * Manual of Style

Non-free image use
Hi Triplesense Reply. The licensing of each image you see on Wikipedia is determined by it copyright status and not every image file you see on Wikipedia is licensed the same. Some files are licensed as public domain or licensed under a free licensed suitable for Wikipedia and these are often collectively referred to as "free images". Other files are licensed as non-free content because of their copyright status and these file are commonly referred to as "non-free images". Non-free image use is highly restricted and each use of such an an image must satisfy Wikipedia's non-free image use policy. One of these restrictions is WP:NFCC, which says that non-free content can only be used in the article namespace. For this reason and as explained in WP:UP, non-free content such as File:NewHollandAgricultureLogo.png and File:NewHolland Construction Logo.jpg cannot be used (i.e., displayed) in User:Triplesense Reply/sandbox. Perhaps you did not notice the edit sums I left the previous times I removed the files; therefore, I'm posting this here to provide more explanation. If you have any questions about this, feel free to ask as WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:17, 3 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Please stop adding the non-free files File:NewHollandAgricultureLogo.png and File:NewHolland Construction Logo.jpg to User:Triplesense Reply/sandbox. As explained above, non-free content cannot be used in your user sandbox per Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. These files have been previously removed a number of times, but you keep re-adding them. Continuing to re-add the files is disruptive and violation of Wikipedia's policy on using copyrighted content and will lead to an administrator being asked to intervene. You're account is fairly new so it's expected that you will not be too familiar with Wikipedia's various policy and guidelines. Mistakes are expected from new editors, and others are willing to assume good faith when they happen. However, repeating the same mistake multiples times, especially after being advised not to do so, is going seen by the Wikipedia community has an indication of (1) an unwillingness to listen and learn, (2) a lack of competence to edit according to relevant policies and guidelines, or (3) both (1) and (2). So my suggestion to you if you don't why these files cannot be used in your sandbox is to ask for help at WP:MCQ or WT:NFCC. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:35, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
Hello, Triplesense Reply. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article CNH Industrial, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate 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).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies.

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Paid editing
Hello Triplesense Reply. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to CNH Industrial, 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:Triplesense Reply. 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. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)