User talk:USPC2015

October 2015
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to United States Pony Clubs has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 20:26, 9 October 2015 (UTC)
 * ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, [ report it here], remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
 * For help, take a look at the introduction.
 * The following is the log entry regarding this message: United States Pony Clubs was changed by USPC2015 (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.857773 on 2015-10-09T20:26:02+00:00.

Conflict of interest
Hello USPC2015. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic. 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. 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, 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:. 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. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message.

Please do it properly or don't do it at all
I sympathize with your efforts to improve the US Pony Club article. However, please read WP:COI and WP:COPYVIO. You can't simply copy and paste material from the club's website here, as it is a copyright violation. Also, you need to cite the sources you use. I would be glad to help you make these improvements if you post your concerns at the talk page of the article, here: Talk:United States Pony Clubs. Also, Wikipedia does not allow corporate accounts, only individual ones, so please do read our COI guidelines (which I have linked) and follow them. Montanabw (talk) 17:13, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Your recent edits
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either: This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.
 * 1) Add four tildes  ( &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; ) at the end of your comment; or
 * 2) With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button (Insert-signature.png or Signature icon.png) located above the edit window.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:42, 15 October 2015 (UTC)

Misunderstanding
You did not understand what we said. The article stays. It is people with a direct interest in the organization who must respect the rules of wikipedia, you cannot copy and paste copyrighted information into a wikipedia article. You also are not supposed to be editing as a "corporate" account - only individuals can edit, because each person is responsible for their own contributions. Wikipedia has very strict rules about people doing editing either for pay or at the request of their employer. If you view the material on the USPC page as incorrect, the thing to do is to explain what is wrong on the talk page and work with experienced editors here to fix the problems. Montanabw (talk) 22:39, 15 October 2015 (UTC)


 * @Montanabw. I am a private entity. I wrote everything I posted on your page. It can be verified through our organization, but since you want to accuse a not-for- profit organization of trying to "profit" from putting accurate information on your site it seems you don't want to do that. What is currently posted is grossly inaccurate. I will continue to either re-post the correct information or delete the page until the correct information is allowed. Your site is not easy to use and continually allows outdated and uneducated "opinions" to be posted. All I want is to make sure an organization I care about is being represented with the most correct information.


 * A user name like "USPC2015" implies that you are an employee of the organization and editing at their behest. If you are not an employee, I suggest that you apologize to USPC for pretending to represent them, and do note that impersonation of another is not allowed on wikipedia.  If you ARE an employee of USPC, you need to follow Wikipedia' conflict of interest guidelines. And in both cases, you need to change your user name because corporate names are not permissible. (See Changing username for how to do it)  Your edits may have been accurate, but they were a blatent copy and paste - which is a violation of copyright and we cannot allow that here. I have explained further at the article talk page.   Montanabw (talk)  05:17, 16 October 2015 (UTC)


 * @montanabw here is what I don't understand. I am a person. I work for an organization that this site has information about. You say I can't post as that organization but the information is about the organization. That is like saying there is a post about me on there but that I am not allowed to edit information about myself. Now, how is that fair? Why is it you tout that you are a free encyclopedia? It should be that you go to each and every entity represented on here and get the information straight from the horse's mouth instead of becoming an opinion rag. That is not the definition of an encyclopedia.
 * I represent the people I am posting about. I wrote ALL of the verbiage that I took from my computer that is also posted on our website because that is the most correct verbiage about the organization that you have information about on your site. I am not misrepresenting anyone. I will go in under a different username but then you will say again that I am plagiarizing when I am not. You keep not reading my WHOLE response just standing behind some guidelines that don't allow your site to be accurate. You want people to use this site... Or am I incorrect in that? Do you want people to continue to know Wikipedia as a site who hosts inaccurate information? I just don't understand. I repeat USPC doesn't want or need monetary gain. My only interest is that you aren't slandering us. I don't want to have to take it further. I just want the information on that page that is about the organization correct. I repeat I am not plagiarizing either because it is MY work. I don't understand why I should have to reword verbiage that I typed- not just on your site but on the one I work for.


 * Individuals are not allowed to edit articles about themselves either. I know it seems stupid, but it keeps people from turning Wikipedia into a promotional vehicle. For an example, say I write a book, get it published, and it hits #1 on the New York Times Bestsellers List. My book gets its own Wikipedia article, and I get my own article as its famous author. I can't edit either the article about the book or the article about me, because I would want to put only good things. I naturally wouldn't want to include things like bad reviews or criticism. If you are just a casual member of the USPC, you can edit the article. If you are being paid to work for them like your username implies, you can't. That is just the fact. You can't just keep blanking the article, and you can't cite your own work either. Cite somebody like Practical Horseman. White Arabian mare  ( Neigh ) 14:25, 16 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare


 * Why would I cite Practical Horseman? That's plagiarizing. I'm not trying to put "look at us" stuff on there. I am trying to update information on a site that is supposed to be factual. It is not a promotional vehicle. We don't need wikipedia to promote our organization. We do a fine job of that. All we want is to not have outdated information on there. The logo is incorrect that is posted. The fact that you choose to keep it up there is slanderous. I could give you a more accurate "picture" but you would say I am plagiarizing, but by letting random people post random information you are Slandering the organization. I will change my name. I will make changes. I will continue to do so until the correct information is accepted or the page is removed. If you keep changing it back to inaccurate, unusable information I will take it to the Executive Director and let it be passed off to our lawyers to deal with. I don't want to do that. All I want is to present the facts. I could care less if you love or hate the organization, only that its history, current use, and logo postage is correct. That is all. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.7.136.198 (talk) 15:45, 16 October 2015 (UTC)


 * "Citing" a website means you rewrote something that appeared on that website. And you have to cite some source, or what you write will be taken down. If Practical Horseman has an article about the importance of Pony Club in developing young equestrians, we can use that as a source to help improve the article because PRAC is a reputable, widely known magazine. If some random blogger writes about Pony Club as a great way to improve young riders, we can't use that because we don't know how reliable that blogger is. They may not even know how to get on a horse, for all we know. Basically, everything that appears on Wikipedia must appear somewhere else first, because it's too easy now for people to make stuff up and say it's true. Books count as sources as well, but you have to read them and cite chapters and page numbers. To make it easier, I'll tell you exactly how to "cite" anything. Read the book chapter, web article, whatever, and take notes of all the important facts. Then write your section in the article in your own words using tags to cite the inline citations. I'm not saying that you are making stuff up, but we have to have sources that are not Pony Club. We can't promote anything, even charities or nonprofit organizations, because Wikipedia has a no advertising policy. White Arabian mare  ( Neigh ) 17:28, 16 October 2015 (UTC)White Arabian mare

USPC2015, please log in when you edit as your IP address can reveal information about you like your physical location. Also, Montanabw is correct, your username implies that you are working on behalf of an organization whose article you are editing. Consider changing your username, via Changing username/Simple, so there is no confusion. Also, differences of opinion on articles, what we term as "content disputes", are common on Wikipedia and are worked out on the article talk page by presenting reliable sources that support your edit and having editors come to a consensus. Liz Read! Talk! 18:14, 16 October 2015 (UTC)