User talk:AdogheJoshua
You are receiving this notice because you recently edited one or more pages relating to blockchain or cryptocurrencies topics. You have not done anything wrong. We just want to alert you that "general" sanctions are authorized for certain types of edits to those pages.
A community decision has authorized the use of general sanctions for pages related to blockchain and cryptocurrencies. The details of these sanctions are described here. All pages that are broadly related to these topics are subject to a one revert per twenty-four hours restriction, as described here.
General sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimise disruption in controversial topic areas. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to these topics that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behaviour, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. An editor can only be sanctioned after the editor has been made aware that general sanctions are in effect. It is only effective if it is logged here. Before continuing to edit pages in these topic areas, please familiarise yourself with the general sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.August 2019
[edit]
Hello AdogheJoshua. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Bitcoin Core, 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 egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.
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, 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:AdogheJoshua. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=AdogheJoshua|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. 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. David Gerard (talk) 14:00, 8 August 2019 (UTC)
Hello David, I guess being interested in a particular topic is not a violation of any Wikipedia's regulation, also, I am a crypto enthusiast and have been reading and writing for various blockchain companies. my interest in editing on Wikepedia is not for any financial gain as being a researcher and writer for more than 5 years has given me the flair for getting proper info. Also, I'm using my spare time (my Vacation time) to do what I love. I guess there is nothing wrong with that. I guess the reason for this flag is because of the website I sourced info from. the site is one of my major sources for crypto news and they are the first on my list when reading news and trends. I make use of other websites too. I guess I'd vary them to ensure that it doesn't look like I'm promoting their website. But meanwhile, I might make use of other sources if that's Ok by you. Regards, Joshua. AdogheJoshua (talk) 14:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)