I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.
To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.
In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).
{{Help me}}
Thanks for the feedback and information. I was tasked to update the Guaranteed Rate page with updated, accurate info. I apologize if the copy came off as biased; I was aware of the conflict of interest statute and attempted to make it as objective and relevant as possible. Though I understand why some of the verbiage could be called into question, I'm curious as to why a sourced citation that is more recent (ie, funded volume from 2016 v 2015) would be discarded? I'll submit a draft for review, per your suggestion, and see if that approach is more effective. Again, thank you!
Klambert3232 (talk) 13:18, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
As the editor who performed that action, I can tell you why I took it. You performed a large group of edits that were sufficiently promotional or otherwise problematic that I deemed it easier to undo everything and then restore individual useful changes, rather than the other way around (I understand that that may seem concerning in itself). If you check the page history, you will see that I've already done some of that.
As for further edits, let me recommend that you post them as suggested individual edits on the Talk page for the article, rather than performing them yourself on the article. And again, in line with WP:PAID, you should be identifying your employer and/or client for any edit - including suggestions on the talk page - that are part of your paid work. --Nat Gertler (talk) 15:04, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thank for that explanation NatGertler. My apologies, as you can probably tell this is my first time. I'll make the individual suggestions via the talk page. Once complete, is there any way you can expedite your subsequent edits? I understand if not; would just like to get our current information posted as soon as possible! Again, sorry you had to walk me through this.Klambert3232 (talk) 15:16, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there NatGertler. I've submitted the requested changes in the talk page, but I didn't see the original text there in order to qualify changes piecemeal. Should I take the text I submitted and post as a draft for review instead? Thank you!Klambert3232 (talk) 15:55, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Putting the whole article there makes it very hard to see what changes you're making to review them. What you want to do is add something like this:
==Changes requested by paid contributor==
I'm Nat Gertler, and I'm being paid for my editing efforts by About Comics. In order to update the article, please replaced "based in Thousand Oaks, California" with "based in Camarillo, California", and to the Awards section, add "Best Corporate Mascot, 2016 Golden Fluffy Awards[1]" and "Top 5 of the Bottom 10 Publishers Award, Comics Buyer's Guide".
You can copy over bits of text from the article page to show what it is you want change. Please realize that it is common in such cases for many of the requests not to be accepted (I'm sure that you can imagine others in your position submitting every minor award or lots of detail that is not relevant to a general encyclopedia.) Thanks for understanding. --Nat Gertler (talk) 16:22, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again NatGertler for your patience and expertise here. I've made a series of singular requests to the page that you can review for justification/advisability. Please let me know what you can accept and what you can't, when you can. I believe they're reasonable and objective, but we'll see. We're just trying to tidy this page up and make it the best representative of our current state of affairs. Again, you have my sincerest appreciation!Klambert3232 (talk) 17:43, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is there some particularly reason that you've already returned to directly editing the article (and furthermore doing so without any edit summaries, much less ones that announce your paid editing conflict?) --Nat Gertler (talk) 22:12, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry, I thought my disclaimer in the 'Talk' page, according to your instructions, took care of that. The particular reason I'm directly editing is because I thought the documentation I provided in the talk page would speak to the edits I made, and I checked the box 'watch this page' not 'minor edit' in order to provide objective visibility. Please don't think I'm trying to be sneaky here, my purpose is to provide the most accurate and up to date info for our company, because there's a lot missing and this initiative has taken on high priority (not that you care; just so you're aware of the reason behind my apparent impatience).Klambert3232 (talk) 00:14, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, you're right that the talk page disclosure should suffice in this case for the revelation of the paid status, but you should still be using the edit summaries. Those make other editors lives easier for when they review edits or are looking for who made what changes when. But yes, you're right, Wikipedia in general will not care that you have a deadline, because it is not something that is intended to serve the subjects of the articles. --Nat Gertler (talk) 04:09, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the clarification Nat. Going forward, I will make sure to document every change in edit summaries as they happen. Appreciate your guidance throughout.Klambert3232 (talk) 13:17, 30 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TheSandDoctor was:
Thank you for your submission, but the subject of this article already exists in Wikipedia. You can find it and improve it at Guaranteed Rate instead.
The comment the reviewer left was:
Please also note that due to the conflict of interest generated by you working for the company, it is advisable that you refrain (do not) edit the article as your edits will most likely be reverted if unsourced to reputable (third party) sources. If you do choose to edit the article, then please make it known in the edit summary that you have a conflict of interest and explain that you are the copy director for Guaranteed Rate.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
Hello! Klambert3232,
I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! TheSandDoctor (talk) 17:33, 29 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply edit the submission and remove the {{db-afc}}, {{db-draft}}, or {{db-g13}} code.
If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.
