User talk:Melanie.e.matthews
Ways to improve Andrew T. Heath
[edit]Hi, I'm JamesG5. Melanie.e.matthews, thanks for creating Andrew T. Heath!
I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. This is heavily weighted towards WP:PROMO content and reads like a campaign press release. It needs extensive rewriting to meet WP:NPOV. Per page creator's LinkedIn profile she works in state government with this individual, there's a clear appearance of WP:COI and possibly WP:PAID without the required disclosure. There are multiple inline links in the text, they all need to be removed (for instance the link to the profile of judge Paul Matthias). Only one valid category has been placed on the article. Multiple sections such as Community make a variety of claims with no citations, this appears to be original research. The whole page is too long with promotional cruft that has little relevance other than as promotion, such as almost the entire Community section, and the second & third sentences of the "Judicial Experience" section. Page needs heavy pruning.
The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.
JamesG5 (talk) 07:18, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
July 2017
[edit]
Hello, I'm JamesG5. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to University of North Carolina at Asheville have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles are written objectively and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. JamesG5 (talk) 07:22, 26 July 2017 (UTC)
Conflict of interest disclosures
[edit]@Melanie.e.matthews: I wanted to be sure you saw the notes above regarding Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest and paid editing. It's easily apparent via Google that you have a business relationship with Mr. Heath and his campaign. To quote from WP:COI:
Conflict of interest (COI) editing involves contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships. Any external relationship can trigger a conflict of interest. That someone has a conflict of interest is a description of a situation, not a judgment about that person's opinions or integrity.
COI editing is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia. It undermines public confidence, and it risks causing public embarrassment to the individuals being promoted. Editors with a COI cannot know whether or how much it has influenced their editing. If COI editing causes disruption, an administrator may opt to place blocks on the involved accounts.
Editors with a COI, including paid editors, are expected to disclose it whenever they seek to influence an affected article's content. Anyone editing for pay must disclose who is paying them, who the client is, and any other relevant affiliation; this is a requirement of the Wikimedia Foundation. In addition, COI editors are generally advised not to edit affected articles directly, and to propose changes on talk pages instead.
This is not intended as a personal attack. The article already has several serious issues (such as the links problem I noted above) and is likely on the borderline of acceptability (candidates for office routinely are removed), failing to disclose a COI properly makes it more likely someone will come along and nominate it for deletion. I'm trying to help you avoid that by showing you what's needed to bring things in to compliance. If you need help, feel free to ask. JamesG5 (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2017 (UTC)
Deletion discussion about Andrew T. Heath
[edit]Hello, Melanie.e.matthews,
I wanted to let you know that there's a discussion about whether Andrew T. Heath should be deleted. Your comments are welcome at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Andrew T. Heath .
If you're new to the process, articles for deletion is a group discussion (not a vote!) that usually lasts seven days. If you need it, there is a guide on how to contribute. Last but not least, you are highly encouraged to continue improving the article; just be sure not to remove the tag about the deletion nomination from the top.
Thanks,