User talk:Unocha.visual

Technically speaking

Welcome!
Hello, Unocha.visual, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful: Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or and a volunteer will visit you here shortly. Again, welcome! Arnoutf (talk) 20:28, 3 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Introduction and Getting started
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article
 * Simplified Manual of Style

UN OCHA maps
Hi Unocha visual and welcome again to Wikipedia.

You seem to have engaged on a mission to add UN OCHA maps to many many country articles. In my view there are some issues with this. First of all, it is Wikipedia etiquette not to engage in changes of massive numbers of articles without trying out a few first and awaiting positive response to your suggestion. It is also best practice to add a talk page discussion at least to announce motivation for your edits, and preferably to achieve consensus before adding substantial material (like infobox contents) especially when editing highly visited article such as country articles.

More on the content (I am now talking about the Netherlands). The OCHA maps do in my view add little to nothing to the articles as there already are locator maps. In fact, additional maps are more likely to add clutter and reduce article quality than improve it. Secondly the maps have an OCHA logo in the right bottom, which is odd as we are not representing their view but a neutral view. So that alone would argue against using these maps in a prominent place (like the infobox). Thirdly content wise, the maps seems flawed (or at best arbitrary) in their choice of municipalities to depict. E.g. the twelve shown municipalities for the Netherlands shows the 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th 7th 9th 11th 12th 21st 25th 30th largest city in terms of inhabitants. This choice is not warranted by either the cities being provincial capitals (e.g. Delft is not) nor a more or less equal distribution on the map surface (North East between Enschede-Apeldoorn and Groningen-Leeuwarden is largely empty, West is rather cluttered) in any case that would be arbitrary too. So where does the choice of cities come from. So in my view, these maps are a problem rather than an improvement (I removed the Dutch map), and I would ask you to stop adding them.

That does not mean I do not appreciate the effort you want to spend at Wikipedia, but I would ask you to try to find agreement through discussion before such large programmes in the futures. Best regards Arnoutf (talk) 20:44, 3 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Just to reiterate 's concerns. While your work is appreciated, please check in on the relevant article talk pages as to whether your OCHA maps are deemed to be of value, such as on the Russia article. I've removed it for now however, if you think it will add value to an already cumbersomely large article, you're welcome to ask other editors who maintain the article for their positions on the issue. --Iryna Harpy (talk) 05:32, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Possible COI, problematic maps
Hello Unocha.visual, unfortunately you have still added more problematic maps to various country articles. I have added a request for advice at the COI-noticeboard. Link is [], if you would like to add your point of view. Regards. GermanJoe (talk) 16:02, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

OCHA article
Hello, Unocha.visual. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. GermanJoe (talk) 22:32, 18 November 2014 (UTC)