User talk:Eudaemonism

Image sizes for thumbnails

Please don't specify specific sizes for images that are being displayed as thumbnails. WP:THUMBSIZE has more information on this practice. Thanks! ElKevbo (talk) 22:30, 20 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Connection with New England Conservatory of Music‎?

What is your connection with the New England Conservatory of Music‎? ElKevbo (talk) 22:34, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a freelancer working with the NEC Archivist and Marketing Director. Eudaemonism (talk) 22:42, 5 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Eudaemonism. The nature of your edits 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 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely 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:Eudaemonism. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Eudaemonism|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. ElKevbo (talk) 04:23, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies! I am updating the article as a freelancer with content that has been provided by various employees of NEC (who I suppose would fall under the GLAM employee clause?), but to be perfectly honest, since I’m not creating the material directly (but rather transcribing it for less technologically-inclined folx), I didn’t thoroughly investigate all of Wikipedia’s creation policies beforehand. I will update my user page to include the appropriate disclosure—and thank you for calling this to my attention! Eudaemonism (talk) 05:11, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It's highly inappropriate for someone who is being paid to edit this or any other article to directly edit the article(s). Please stop editing the article and begin making suggestions and requests in the article's Talk page. You have a clear and direct conflict-of-interest. ElKevbo (talk) 22:39, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I’m afraid we’re not correctly understanding each other. Am I incorrect that NEC and its employees would fall under the “GLAM” provision quoted below (from Paid Disclosures FAQ)?

“These requirements shouldn't keep teachers, professors, or people working at galleries, libraries, archives, and museums ("GLAM") institutions from making contributions in good faith! If you fall into one of those categories, you are only required to comply with the disclosure provision when you are compensated by your employer or by a client specifically for edits and uploads to a Wikimedia project.”

Again, I am NOT being paid to create original or “sponsored” content. I have been hired to upload content provided directly by NEC employees who 1) wish to make edits/corrections to their institution’s page but 2) personally lack the skill set to do so. It seems to me that, with the nature of the institution (non-profit/conservatory/archive/higher ed), plus my having added the disclosure you recommended to my user page, these edits fall under that category. Is this incorrect? If so, could you direct me to where this has been better clarified?

I truly appreciate your help and the open discussion. Thanks! Eudaemonism (talk) 23:25, 6 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I don't agree with your interpretation of that FAQ; it sounds like you are being "compensated by your employer or by a client specifically for edits and uploads to a Wikimedia project." You're welcome to seek the opinions of other editors, of course! But I also don't think that proposing edits in the article's Talk page is difficult or time-consuming.

A conflict of interest is not a "bad" thing - you're not being branded with a scarlet letter. We all have relationships with people and organizations and those relationships can color our judgment, consciously and unconsciously. We ask editors who are interested in editing in areas where they have a meaningful conflict of interest to practice caution, particularly if they have a financial relationship with the subject. I would do the same thing if I thought that an article about my employer or one of my clients needed significant work. ElKevbo (talk) 02:42, 7 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]