User talk:Maerlander

Maerlander, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Maerlander! 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, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you.

November 2016

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to João de Deus (medium), without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 18:59, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Hello, Maerlander. 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 COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 20:18, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

John of God isn't a family, friend, school, company, club, or organization, or a any competing companies' projects or product of mine. Thank youMaerlander (talk) 23:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

If you continue trying to make money by promoting João you may get reported to the administrators, one of which may decide to block you. Please stop it. Thank you, (((The Quixotic Potato))) (talk) 21:26, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Quixotic Potato, As you most probably know as a Quixotic Potato, Don Quixote, was someone who tried to bring justice to the world, and that is what I am trying as well with the john of god article. I understand that you say, you can not write about the topic, because you have an indirect relationship with the topic. Yes, indeed, I visited and was touched by what I saw/see.

But the problem is in this, that basically all sources are indirectly related then to the topic. All people who wrote books about John of God, wrote dissertations or even PhD's, where touched by the subject and then became guides to show other people what is happening here too! Its to easy to say that all these people are just trying to make money.

So hence, there is polarisation: there is the group of people who believe, got touched and then are obviously involved with the subject. And then you have the non-believers, who never visited and are against the subject. Then taking the average wiki editor.. most probably cynical & atheistic, not believing when it isn't proven. Which then leaves the eligible writers group to people who are clearly negatively biased towards the topic. And I don't think that is fair!

thanks for hearing me out, and I look forward hearing your suggestion on solving this issue.Maerlander (talk) 23:24, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]