User talk:Wiki3157

April 2021
Hello Wiki3157. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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:Wiki3157. 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, do not edit further until you answer this message. MrOllie (talk) 15:33, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello MrOllie, (I am new to this so I apologize if this is not the correct manner to respond to your message.) I am actually a scientist that focuses on robotic rehab and has performed some of the seminal randomized control and implementation studies, so this is one of my specific areas of expertise. All of the edits I made were directly from peer-reviewed publications (many of mine or my colleagues working in the space). I am not receiving payments for editing wikipedia. Wiki3157 (talk) 18:32, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , The COI guidelines are more broad than that. Do you have any association with Motus Nova? MrOllie (talk) 19:55, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry for not being as clear as you asked in your original message, e.g. "directly or indirectly". I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. I simply started editing these pages because of familiarity, I use these tools (produced by Motus Nova) and am just much more familiar with their scientific foundations.Wiki3157 (talk) 22:45, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , In that case, as long as you don't embed any more commercial external links(see WP:EL ) or unnecessary namedrop particular companies (WP:PROMO), you should be fine. If you want to cite anything you've written yourself COI best practices say you should bring that up on the talk page of the associated article. MrOllie (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2021 (UTC)

Makes sense, sorry for trouble. I can see why the edits would have the appearance of bias but the truth of the matter is that there are very few devices out there with scientific support and I actually referenced the only other one (MIT-MANUS) as well and linked the BIONIK LABS too. So how should I handle that if the field is so small? Is it better to just not link to the external sites?

Also, as another point of clarification, are you indicating that I make suggested edits on the talk page prior to editing the main page only for including any of my peer-reviewed published work (it would be appropriately cited/referenced) or should that be done for all edits? Also, will the edits I made originally be reverted or should I go back and do that manually? (Thanks for guiding me through this, still learning) Wiki3157 (talk) 23:16, 25 April 2021 (UTC)
 * , After indicating that you understood, you are back to edit warring over promotional mentions of particular robots. Please, stop doing that. Wikipedia must be neutral, and it is not a place to promote one system or another. MrOllie (talk) 21:27, 1 May 2021 (UTC)

MrOllie I am not promoting anything. Stop removing relevant information.

If you are so concerned about a black and white interpretation of the WP:PROMO rule then you should remove the specific names used in the every other wikipedia page, e.g

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_reality or any one of the hundreds of trade names listed for drugs. Wiki3157 (talk) 22:36, 1 May 2021 (UTC)
 * , That is a commonly seen argument on Wikipedia, see WP:OTHERSTUFF. In any case, if you have found other examples of inappropriate promotion on Wikipedia, that is not a reason to add more. - MrOllie (talk) 03:06, 2 May 2021 (UTC)