User talk:Anntle

Your submission at Articles for creation: Draft:ISA (film) (June 6)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time.
Please read the comments left by the reviewer on your submission. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, you can find it at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/ISA (film).
To edit the submission, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, or on the reviewer's talk page.

Thank you for your
contributions to Wikipedia!

Please remember to link to the submission!

You can also get real-time chat help from experienced editors.

MatthewVanitas (talk) 03:41, 6 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Anntle, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about 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!

Your submission at AfC ISA (film) was accepted

ISA (film), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

TheQ Editor (Talk) 17:23, 7 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia

Hi Anntle. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date are on a bit of a run about the Fluency production company and the Secret Cinema (company). I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and questions for you below.

Hello, Anntle. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia: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.

Comments and question

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 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. While I am not asking you to disclose your identity (anonymity is strictly protecting by out WP:OUTING policy) would you please disclose if you have some relationship with either of those companies or their principals? You can answer how ever you wish (giving personally identifying information or not), but if there is a relationship, with please disclose it. After you respond (and you can just reply below), perhaps we can talk a bit about editing Wikipedia, to give you some more orientation to how this place works. Thanks!

You can reply here - I am watching this page. Once you do, we can take it from there. Thanks in advance for talking! Jytdog (talk) 00:46, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jytdog,

Thanks for your note. I appreciate it very much and certainly want to look to you for guidance. Can you see this note I'm sending here first? I want to make sure that you have this response.

Want to make sure that all contributions have citations and properly notated without any bias. I am not with Fluency Productions. Please share any guidance you have.

Thanks! anntle — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.85.21.189 (talk) 01:24, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response. Yes, I do see this. Thanks for clarifying that you are not with Fluency - would you please answer the broader question - namely, do you have any relationships relevant to your editing here? Thanks Jytdog (talk) 02:14, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jytdog - I had written you a follow up response and it wasn't captured for some reason. It was regarding Secret Cinema. YES, I am a part of the organization but am not paid by them to work on wikipedia page. The edits made, I felt, were neutral, mostly just adding more information about the company making sure all was cited. How best to disclose going forward? Is there a way to have things vetted before posting? Can you be our helper and watch the page? As you can see the controversies and negative info was kept as they were cited - moving forward, we'd just like to add production notes. Please advise and thank you!

One more - I have not touched the ISA Page in over a year - are you seeing activity? Concerns me if you do as they would have not been me. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.60.194.194 (talk • contribs) 16:51, 31 July 2015‎ (UTC) [reply]

Thanks for replying! Quick note on Wikipedia logistics, or maybe better, etiqutte. First - you have an account, and you should log in when you come to WP. I am assuming you are "Anntle" but you ~could~ be any random person on the internet. Right? So please do log in.

Next, in Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon ":" in front of your comment, and the WP software converts that into an indent; if the other person has indented once, then you indent twice by putting two colons "::" which the WP software converts into two intents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense.

Finally, signing. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages. That is how we know who said what. Will reply on the substance in a second... Jytdog (talk) 17:10, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

OK, responding on the substance now (but note, I am indenting the same amount here, as I did above, b/c I am still responding to the same comment of yours above). Thank you very much for disclosing that you are part of the organization, and that you are not being paid to work on the article. So - you are "receiving consideration" per the Terms of Use, but you do still have a conflict of interest as described in the COI guideline. Great.

As I mentioned above, we manage COI in WP in two ways. The first is disclosure. It would be useful if you disclosed that on your user page, which is here: User:Anntle, by writing something there like: "I work with the Secret Cinema company and am interested in articles about film" or the like. You can say more or less if you want, but what is there should be aimed at telling the WP community what you care about here (not be a general bio of you or the like). I have already disclosed the relationship for you on the article Talk page (which is the other place where it would be useful to disclose it).

The other piece of COI management is peer review. In academia, articles are peer reviewed two ways - when an article is submitted to a journal (which may reject it at that stage, or may accept it for further review) and then by formal peer review - before it is published. Here in WP, anybody can create an article, and anybody can directly edit any article, click save, and the new content is published - it is immediate.

What we ask editors with a COI to do, is the following. If they create a new article, to submit it through the articles for creation process, which really is peer review. You have been doing that already, so you are familiar with that.
And for articles that are "live", for content where they have a COI, to make a request on the Talk page to add some specific content or make some specific change -- other, independent editors can review it, and if it is OK, the content can be added to the article. That way, the integrity of Wikipedia is preserved. We have gotten some great content added to WP that way. You can request content just by simply asking for it on the talk page, or you can use the "edit request" function. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page - 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.

Will you do that going forward on the Secret Cinema article and related content elsewhere in WP? Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 17:24, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, on the ISA thing. I don't know if you know this, but we can all see each others' contributions -- yours are here: Special:Contributions/Anntle. When I approach editors with questions about COI, I always look over contributions before I open my mouth to think about whether to say anything or not. :) Jytdog (talk) 17:27, 31 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]