User talk:Kghantoush

Welcome

Hello, Kghantoush, and Welcome to Wikipedia!

Welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you enjoy the encyclopedia and want to stay. As a first step, you may wish to read the Introduction.

If you have any questions, feel free to ask me at my talk page – I'm happy to help. Or, you can ask your question at the New contributors' help page.

Here are some more resources to help you as you explore and contribute to the world's largest encyclopedia...

Finding your way around:

Table of contents / Department directory

The Wikipedia Adventure (a tutorial orienting you with Wikipedia)

Need help?

Questions – a guide on where to ask questions
Cheatsheet – quick reference on Wikipedia's mark-up codes
Wikipedia's 5 pillars – an overview of Wikipedia's foundations

Article wizard – a Wizard to help you create articles
The simplified ruleset – a summary of Wikipedia's most important rules
Guide to Wikipedia – a thorough step-by-step guide to Wikipedia

How you can help:

Contributing to Wikipedia – a guide on how you can help

Community portal – Wikipedia's hub of activity

Additional tips...

Please sign your messages on talk pages with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically insert your "signature" (your username and a date stamp). The or button, on the tool bar above Wikipedia's text editing window, also does this.
If you would like to play around with your new Wiki skills without changing the mainspace, the Sandbox is for you.

Kghantoush, good luck, and have fun. – S Philbrick (Talk) 21:10, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Recent edits

I see that you have been making massive changes to Schwartz Center for Compassionate Healthcare.

Are you associated with that organization? If so, we require that you declare your conflict of interest. If you don't know how to do that I'll help.

You copied some material from a copyrighted source and cited fair use. That may be legally defensible but it's not the way we do things that Wikipedia. That said, this is a big place, and if there is precedent for this we can revisit the edits.

We do have specific provision for copying large amounts of text from other sources but I don't think this fits in with that type of edit.--S Philbrick (Talk) 21:13, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I now see that an earlier editor had done something similar and you may have thought it was acceptable. I'm unhappy that the prior edits hadn't been caught until now.--S Philbrick (Talk) 21:26, 11 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Kghantoush, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Kghantoush! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Schwartz Center for Compassionate Healthcare

Hi Kghantoush,

You really shouldn't be editing an article on behalf of the organisation for which you work. Please see WP:FCOI for more on this topic, but the short version is "If you have a close financial relationship with a topic you wish to write about – including as an owner, employee, contractor or other stakeholder – you are advised to refrain from editing affected articles. You may suggest changes on the talk page of those articles, where you should disclose your COI. You can use the {{request edit}} template to suggest changes."

What is especially problematic is that you write "I was tasked with updating this site to agree with its current messaging, mission statement, vision." That's not what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is to provide information about notable topics from a neutral point of view. Not information in line with the messaging of the subject of the article.

Another thing: you should not use the {{UserboxCOI}} or {{Connected contributor}} on article pages. They go on your user page and on the article's talk page, respectively. --Slashme (talk) 21:09, 12 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry and it isn't your fault, but your manager has put you in an untenable situation. They may well be unaware of the rules but please point them to our conflict of interest policy. You should not be directly editing the article, as noted above. I'm not sure who dreamed up the fair use concept but that approach will not work. Please feel free to ask if you need more information; I'm sorry we are putting you in an awkward position.--S Philbrick (Talk) 00:28, 13 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

Thanks so much for explaining, but I'm still a little confused. I understand that Wikipedia should retain a neutral point of view, and I'm happy to go back and make neutral-only contributions, but some items on the Schwartz Center for Compassionate Healthcare Page are incorrect now, like the founded date, the address, the mission statement that goes in the infobox, and the number of members, employees, and volunteers. The Schwartz Center is a fairly new organization that has done a lot of expanding/changing in a short time, and little of the information on the page is still correct. I do not understand why I cannot make these factual changes. I also updated all the links, which were broken/old. If you could explain how I can make these changes acceptably, I would really appreciate it. Thanks again.

Kghantoush (talk) 16:03, 14 July 2016 (UTC) kghantoush[reply]

The explanation is just above your post - I'll copy it here:

You may suggest changes on the talk page of those articles, where you should disclose your COI. You can use the {{request edit}} template to suggest changes."

It is our (painful) experience that edits made by people closely associated with an organization are very often problematic. It isn't a case that they aren't factual - a selected list of accomplishments, every single one of which is factual, does not produce neutral coverage of a subject. I recognize the timing problem - it takes time after a requested edit to get it in the article, but our interest in making sure coverage is neutral is more important.--S Philbrick (Talk) 18:38, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that a list of accomplishments is not neutral reporting from an employee. However, everything that I listed in my previous message is neutral reporting. Founding dates, locations, numbers etc. cannot be disputed, but these items were still reverted back to the false information from the outdated version. I did not add a selected list of accomplishments. Kghantoush (talk) 19:38, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In your reverted edits, you did not simply correct errors: you also put back all the promotional text that had been removed. That was why I reverted those edits. From now on, please do not edit the article directly any more. That will be seen as editing under a conflict of interest and can lead to a block. Rather, as Sphilbrick has said, post any requests for modifications to the article on the talk page, and we will make the changes if necessary.

With that being said, we tolerate it when paid editors correct verifiably factually incorrect data in an article. For example, this edit was not really problematic. However, that is a concession, and any editing that you do that is anything except direct correction of errors can lead to you being blocked from editing without warning, so it's really safer just to point out errors on the talk page. --Slashme (talk) 21:10, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize; when I said my "previous message," I was referring to the list of details that I wrote to you here in my message to you, not to the edits that I made (which I completely understand were promotional, but it's what I was told to include on the page. I knew/know that the paragraphs of language are not Wikipedia-friendly - was just trying to do my job). I'll list any other corrections on the Talk page.

If I wanted to expand the page (add more sections), am I not allowed to suggest those on the talk page - assuming that my suggestions contain neutral and original language? For example, is the "Leadership" section that I created (it was deleted) considered unacceptable? Kghantoush (talk) 23:46, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Also, is this the Talk page where I suggest edits? Thanks again! Kghantoush (talk) 23:47, 14 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I understand! The place to request edits is Talk:Schwartz Center for Compassionate Healthcare. In general, every article page has a "talk" tab at the top which links to the article's talk page. The leadership section that you added was way too much information for such a small organisation. Even for massive organisations, we don't usually go beyond mentioning one or two key positions. For example, the American Red Cross article doesn't go beyond mentioning the chairperson position. --Slashme (talk) 07:34, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, and to answer your other question, you can request anything you want on the article's talk page. Other editors can then decide whether they will approve or reject those requests. --Slashme (talk) 07:39, 15 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, thanks so much your help! Kghantoush (talk) 23:28, 17 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]