User talk:DavidRJD

September 2024

Hello DavidRJD. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Nexperia, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged 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:DavidRJD. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=DavidRJD|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. Amigao (talk) 19:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello,

While I do have an association with Nexperia, I am not paid for the edits. These edits are done on my own time.

There is significant misinformation about semiconductor companies in the press, particularly from competitors who look to taint the image of one company by using racial or political affiliations to demonize it.

Nexperia is not a SOE. The definition of SOE is found in State-owned enterprise. Chinese ownership and Chinese State Ownership are very different things, and it appears as though we are conflating these. DavidRJD (talk) 21:35, 13 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any external relationship is considered a conflict of interest which must be disclosed. FifthFive (talk) 00:34, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I receive no compensation for edits to Wikipedia and am not employed by Wingtech. I've provided neutral and industry-standard references for the changes made. DavidRJD (talk) 00:38, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I should have worded it better - what I was trying to say is that conflict of interest is possible without direct payment. FifthFive (talk) 01:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've had no contact with anyone within Wingtech regarding Wikipedia, and I have never been hired by or paid by Wingtech. I've been in the industry for a long time, and the political climate is such that competitors are labeling each other as "Chinese State-Owned" to disparage them. I'd like to correct this and other entries, as I have reliable sources to cite. I only want to make changes when easily verifiable information indicates that the Wiki entry is misleading or wrong. DavidRJD (talk) 01:18, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Since you have now declared a conflict of interest, you probably should review and follow WP:COIE henceforth. - Amigao (talk) 19:29, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have on CoI. Can you please provide a reference for your changes? DavidRJD (talk) 19:45, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You declared a COI, yet you do not seem to be interested in following the process of WP:COIEDIT. - Amigao (talk) 20:13, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So that we are clear I've added the specific percentages from 2024. Your only citation seems to be from 2021. If you have something that disagrees with my documentation, please let me know. DavidRJD (talk) 20:16, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So I take it from your reply that you do not intend to follow WP:COIEDIT given your declared association with Nexperia? - Amigao (talk) 20:25, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:COIEDIT Is where there is a COI. I have none. DavidRJD (talk) 21:06, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So what is your relationship with Nexperia, then? —C.Fred (talk) 21:10, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I work in the semiconductor industry. Nexperia makes about 10% of semiconductors. DavidRJD (talk) 21:15, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be above board, I have clarified that i have a paid relationship with a subsidiary of Nexperia. That is reflected on my talk page. DavidRJD (talk) 04:50, 26 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Nexperia. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Editors with a COI, broadly construed, are required to follow WP:COIEDIT. Amigao (talk) 20:52, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, as you did at Nexperia, you may be blocked from editing. Amigao (talk) 21:08, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Edits

@talk:Amigao Do you mind if I send you other edits for your input? I'd like to avoid any future arguments where we use admins. I'm not sure if this is the best way to communicate with you. DavidRJD (talk) 21:30, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You have already declared that you "have an association with Nexperia" (your words) so it's kind of hard to un-ring that COI bell. I would recommend that you follow WP:COIEDIT and WP:PLAINSIMPLECOI from here and propose the edits on the relevant article's talk page. - Amigao (talk) 21:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

DavidRJD please clarify your association with Nexperia. When a user states, as you have stated above I do have an association with [a company], I am not paid for the edits. These edits are done on my own time, that pretty much universally means that they are employed by the company but are editing on their own initiative. That still represents a significant conflict of interest which you must fully declare.

Also, please clarify why you wish to avoid the involvement of admins? Axad12 (talk) 21:51, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not looking to avoid admins, I was hoping to work with the people that seem to be interested in the topic to come to a consensus. I thought we should be working together to avoid edit wars, right? DavidRJD (talk) 21:54, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I said, please clarify your association with Nexperia. How can you possibly expect people to work with you when you won't even properly declare your own conflict of interest?

You have now been asked to do this on so many occasions that further failure to do so will be interpreted as an act of bad faith. Axad12 (talk) 22:07, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You've said above that you are not employed by Wingtech and you've had no contact with anyone within Wingtech regarding Wikipedia, and I have never been hired by or paid by Wingtech.

But you make no similar comment re: Nexperia, saying instead that you do have an association with Nexperia. What is that association? Axad12 (talk) 22:20, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Amigao reported a conflict, and the admins closed it. We've been up and down the admin trail already, and there is no issue.

Nexperia is not a SOE, and the ownership documents from 2024 show that unequivocally. I want accurate information out there. DavidRJD (talk) 22:27, 22 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No admin "closed" anything over at WP:COIN. It doesn't seem like you want to answer the question that several editors have asked. Regarding Nexperia, any substantive discussion can and should take place on the article's talk page, not here. - Amigao (talk) 00:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A polite request...

I appreciate that won't have been familiar with the relevant policy, but please refrain from drawing attention to off-wiki material which might lead to the WP:OUTING of an editor. I did not investigate but it sounds as though you were right to have been concerned. I have asked an admin to WP:REVDEL (i.e. permanently remove) the relevant post. Axad12 (talk) 07:02, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate it. Can you cross-post this on CoI page? I think this explains better my concern, and I don't think we need to dive deeper here. DavidRJD (talk) 07:06, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would, but for the time being I don't want to draw attention to the post. Once it's been revdelled I could add something to the COIN thread along the lines of "I understand that this relates to off-wiki concerns", but even if I do that it might attract attention to the off-wiki material.

It may be best if I also request revdel to the most recent posts at COIN.

On the broader issue, I suggest that we de-escalate and just wait to see what other editors have to say about the edits you have suggested. As I think I've said, I have no strong views one way or the other on those potential edits. I do take on board your recent point about the impact of labels. I hope that others will investigate the statements in the sources that have been highlighted and agree on a wording which reflects the reality of the situation.

Kind regards, Axad12 (talk) 07:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. DavidRJD (talk) 07:20, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For info: [1]. I think probably best if the admin revdels the great majority of the COIN thread, but we shall see. I shall now be offline for the next 7-10 hours but hopefully it will be resolved relatively soon. Axad12 (talk) 07:49, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

'Striking' comments.

'Striking' comments refers to this: ~~Struck comment~~. Not deleting them. Also, you deleted comments that other people made as well, which is usually considered talk page vandalism. Kindly revert yourself and then strike the comments you would like to strike (only your own) properly. MrOllie (talk) 22:16, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I will do that now. Thank you! DavidRJD (talk) 22:18, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I reverted the edits; then, I used the <s></s> tag you used in your message. When the admin told me to strike, I did think she meant delete -- so thank you for your comment. DavidRJD (talk) 22:31, 23 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, DavidRJD. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting 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. Thank you. Amigao (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

WP:AGF. DavidRJD (talk) 21:37, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unrelated

Some advice that is not related to whatever else is going on; I noticed that your userpage says: My edits are based solely on my research. Please read WP:OR if you haven't already. Polygnotus (talk) 22:56, 23 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Appreciate that. I worked out that language with my mentor prior to using it but can see how it could be read as WP:OR instead of WP:RS as intended. I've adjusted accordingly. DavidRJD (talk) 14:59, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

Star Mississippi 01:47, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

DavidRJD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I have read and understood the TOU. I am not being paid for the edits made, but I am paid by a subsidiary for work unrelated to Wikipedia. This was in my talk back page out of caution. I will not to edit topics directly in the future, but I plan to build consensus on these topics and ask other editors to edit. I've stated: "This is why I'm taking a break from editing until I better understand how things work." DavidRJD (talk) 02:00, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

If you're not going to be editing, there's no need to unblock you as blocks only prevent editing. (note that "editing" is generally considered to be any change to any type of page on Wikipedia, including talk pages) You also don't address the casting aspersions aspect of the block. 331dot (talk) 08:42, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.