User talk:Arturo Guillermo Munoz

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Arturo Guillermo Munoz. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Arturo Muñoz (intelligence), you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Please request changes on the article's Talk page, rather than making them yourself. Tacyarg (talk) 13:58, 25 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Tacyarg: Thank you for taking the time to respond. I just saw your message. This is the first time that I try to navigate the Wikipedia system. I will be the first to admit that I don't know what I am doing. I sent a message to a Wikipedia team that the website says responds to requests for edits, but I received no response. You are the first person that I have been able to talk to and I appreciate it. The basic problem is that a friend of mine created this Wikipedia page years ago trying to be helpful. She meant well, but the way she wrote it up was full of exaggerations, hyperbole, and inaccuracies. The over the top adulation was embarrassing and made me the object of ridicule among my colleagues. For example, the original version says that I received a Ph.D. magna cum laude. Yes I have a Ph.D. but the cum laude designations are for undergraduate degrees. Yes, I did field work with the Yanomamo Indians, but it was months, not years as the original version says. Yes, I had positions of authority at CIA but I was never what I would consider "high ranking" and my successes were not "countless." I could count them. To say I had countless successes diminishes the credibility of the whole article. Yes I did classified operations but to say they were "highly classified" is too much. To say that I was a "CIA Chief of Operations" could be construed as me being the DDO which in my case would be ridiculous, and so on. I have never pretended to be what I am not (an ironic thing to say for a former case officer) and this is what the Wikipedia article does.

It has been years since this profile came out, but I did not act to rectify it sooner out of consideration for the feelings of the person that wrote it. However, I have gotten to the point that either this thing gets edited correctly or I will ask that it be shut down. I understand that there is an intrinsic conflict of interest in a person editing an article about himself. I only attempted it because I got no response when I first asked Wikipedia for help. I have another friend who is working closely with me and she can make the edits that I consider indispensable, if that satisfies Wikipedia's criterion. Another option is for me to send you all my edits and you can determine if they are appropriate. Also, I understand that there were problems with the links. We can fix those. We can provide links or sources to verify much of the material. That said, the basic information on the CIA part of my background is from my CIA Publications Review Board (PRB) approved resume. I don't think that would be an acceptable source because nobody has access to it, even though it is unclassified. I should add at this point that the basic information in the Wikipedia page is generally correct, but there is so much exaggeration that it ruins it.

There are some links in the article that are downright wrong, attributing to me material that others have published. I am sure that this was not done maliciously, but was simply an error. I am very intent on fixing those. That said, I don't understand what Wikipedia means by "inappropriate external links" are or what "inappropriate promotional language" is. Wikipedia guidance says avoid linking to my organization's website. However, one of the proposed changes I would like to make it is to give a full record of my articles/ books published by RAND and link them to the RAND web page where they can be downloaded for free. Am I not supposed to do that? This is not a money-making venture. Currently I am an adjunct at RAND (not a staff employee) and am working as an independent contractor in the intelligence community doing lessons learned studies.

Given all these issues, the question may arise whether a Wikipedia page on me is even worth it. After reviewing all the varied activities that I have done over the years, I would argue that it is justifiable, especially if we can provide links to publications or results of conferences/ seminars that would be useful for the readers. For example, I recently attended a conference held at the US Naval Academy at Annapolis on "Unconventional Warfare Lessons Learned." I presented a paper on the rise and fall of the local defense forces in Afghanistan which will be posted on the FPRI website this month or next month. I would like to add a link in my Wikipedia page to that article. It discusses in detail the US Army Village Stability Operations (VSO) program which I helped to initiate. In my mind, that type of information is relevant and is worth the effort that we are now undergoing. On a different note, I mention that I helped the Sierra Club lobby against the Pan American Highway completion in the Darien Gap. In looking for links to back that up, I found a web page on the legal case which cites my critique directly as a reason for rejecting the Department of Transportation's Environmental Impact Statement. I think most readers are completely unaware of that 1976 case and it would help inform current positions on controversial environmental policy issues. Pls let me know on what my next steps should be. Thanks again for your time and attention. Dr. Arturo G. Muñoz. Arturo Guillermo Munoz (talk) 07:22, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, thanks for your reply, and I take your point about the style. I'm going to ask for help over at the WP:TEAHOUSE, as I think this is a bit beyond my scope to resolve. Tacyarg (talk) 07:43, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Link to discussion WP:TEAHOUSE#Arturo Muñoz (intelligence). Tacyarg (talk) 07:52, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You will find some useful advice at WP:About you and our FAQ for article subjects. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 13:42, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

November 2024

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because the username, Arturo Guillermo Munoz, matches the name of a well-known, living person.

If you are the person represented by this username, please note that the practice of blocking such usernames is to protect you from being impersonated, not to discourage you from editing Wikipedia. You may choose to edit under a new username (see information below), but keep in mind that you are welcome to continue to edit under this username.

If you choose to keep your current username, please send an email to info-enwikimedia.org including your real name and your Wikipedia username to receive instructions from our volunteer response team about account verification. Please do not send documentation without being requested to do so.

If you are not the person represented by this username, you are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

Please take a moment to either create a new account, or request a username change to this account.

To create a new account with a different username, simply log out of this account and then click here to make a new one.
If you prefer to change the username of this account, you may do so by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Important items to note:

The new username that you choose must comply with Wikipedia's username policy.
The new username you choose cannot already be taken and used by another account. You can search here to see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns, "There is no global account for [username]", that means it is available.

Appeals: If your username is not in violation of Wikipedia's username policy, and if you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the following text to the bottom of your user talk page (this page): {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Thank you. — rsjaffe 🗣️ 13:47, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]