User talk:Павел Катаев

March 2017

Hello, I'm Atlantic306. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think a mistake was made, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please do not add unreferenced mateial to Wikipedia, additions need references Atlantic306 (talk) 19:20, 16 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Nikita Borisoglebsky. Thank you. Wes Mouse ^Talk 20:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hi, Павел Катаев, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that 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 Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question.

However, there is a small issue with your username. As it is in a non-Latin alphabet script it may not display correctly for many other users. Although usernames like yours are not prohibited, Wikipedia's signature guideline and username policy encourage you, as a courtesy to other users, to alter your signature so that it also includes a transliteration of your username using Latin characters, so others can see it correctly. For the how-to of tailoring your username, please see WP:CUSTOMSIG.

Thanks, and feel free to message me about anything. Wes Mouse ^Talk 20:05, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wes Mouse ^Talk  20:05, 17 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Павел Катаев. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Nikita Borisoglebsky, 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 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. Based on what you have written in this edit summary, you have confessed to editing on behalf of the article subject, which is a serious violation of Wikipedia rules. I strongly urge you to cease any further edits. If you wish for content to be added, then make your requests at Talk:Nikita Borisoglebsky Wes Mouse ^Talk 18:39, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Wes Mouse ^Talk 19:34, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Павел Катаев I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia, along with regular editing.

My attention was called to your editing by a notice posted at the conflict of interest noticeboard listed above.

Your edits to date are indeed promotional with regard to Nikita Borisoglebsky and you disclosed here that you represent that person, and are editing here on their behalf.

You have already been given notice of the Conflict of interest guideline and WP:PAID policy above.

Please read that notice and the links in it, and please read the below, and reply below.

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. As noted above, you disclosed your relationship in an edit note.

To finish the disclosure piece, would you please add the disclosure to your user page (which is User:Павел Катаев - a redlink, because you haven't written anything there yet). Just something simple like: "I represent Nikita Borisoglebsky and have a conflict of interest with regard to him" would be fine. If you want to add anything else there that is relevant to what you want to do in WP feel free to add it, but please don't add anything promotional about the company (see WP:USERPAGE for guidance if you like).

Another editor added a tag to the top of Talk:Nikita Borisoglebsky, so the disclosure is done at the article, and the article itself has also been tagged to provide readers with notice that someone with a COI has had a major influence on it. But once you disclose on your user page, the disclosure piece of this will be done.

As I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is a form of peer review. This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and voilà there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world. So the bias that conflicted editors tend to have, can go right into the article. Conflicted editors are also really driven to try to make the article fit with their external interest. If they edit directly, this often leads to big battles with other editors.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is:

a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft through the WP:AFC process, disclose your COI on the Talk page, and then submit the draft article for review (the AfC process sets up a nice big button for you to click when it is ready) so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and

b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. You can make the edit request easily - and provide notice to the community of your request - by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at Talk:Nikita Borisoglebsky - there is a link at "click here" in that section -- if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want).

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content. If you are not sure if something is uncontroversial, please ask at the Talk page.

Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on the Nikita Borisoglebsky article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 20:59, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Will you please reply here? Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 12:58, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

March 2017

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to be blocked from editing Wikipedia. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to lead to a block. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 14:46, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Final warning

Consider this your final warning. You are NOT permitted to edit the article Nikita Borisoglebsky, as you have already declared you are a representative of the musician. Any further edits made on the article by yourself, will lad to your account being blocked. @NeilN:, you may wish to intervene here, as the situation is seriously getting out of hand. The user has declared they are a representative of the musician, and are being paid by the Moscow Philharmonic Society to make such edits. I have just recently removed their COI edits again. Wes Mouse ^Talk 18:37, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hm. Павел Катаев, as discussed above, you should not edit the article directly as you did here.

Really importantly, in that edit note, you wrote "Changes accepted on the Talk page" - this is a bad thing for two reasons.

1) it is not true. The changes were not accepted on the talk page. Do not make misrepresentations in edit notes.

2) In any case, as discussed above, you should not edit directly. After other editors have reviewed your proposed changes, they will be implemented by the other editors. The independent editors might say "OK, you can go ahead and implement these changes" but that did not happen either.

Wes is correct, that if you continue to keep trying to force your changes into the article, you will end up blocked or banned. Please do read WP:COI and please follow what it says there. There is no need for things to get dramatic if you just take it slow, and follow the COI guideline. Jytdog (talk) 22:19, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]