User talk:PRbyTabitha
Managing a conflict of interest
[edit]
Hello, PRbyTabitha. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Pure Romance, 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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Your username strongly implies you are associated with Pure Romance. If so, you must disclose this. MarcGarver (talk) 14:02, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I am a Pure Romance consultant which is how I know that your information is inaccurate! I added a reputable source for the information that I changed so I'm unsure as to why it is a problem that I am correcting your misinformation. Pure Romance has not been an MLM for over a year and yet you refuse to let anyone update this information. Have you even read the source that was added or are you just reverting the article back because you refuse to actually educate yourself as to what is accurate. I'm genuinely curious as this article as had several attempts to update it since the change. My update to this article was NOT a paid contribution but an attempt to correct the misinformation that this company chooses to continue to push even though there are reputable sources that say other wise. I would greatly appreciate a better explanation of why you refuse to allow this article to be updated and accurate. Please take a moment to read this article to better inform yourself:
- https://wwd.com/beauty-industry-news/wellness/sexual-wellness-brand-pure-romance-removes-multi-level-marketing-1235633008/ PRbyTabitha (talk) 14:35, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is that the terms of use of this website require you to disclose that you are paid for your contributions. If you don't make that disclosure, you cannot edit. MarcGarver (talk) 15:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not being paid anything for correcting your inaccurate information so I'm not understanding why there is an issue with me being a consultant or why I should have to disclose that to update inaccurate information. I would have corrected you even if I wasn't because you're removing accurate information because you're being biased about who it comes from. That doesn't make much sense when there was a reputable source cited for the information that was provided. So if I'm not being paid for updating the information you are providing then why is there an issue with me updating it? PRbyTabitha (talk) 00:35, 29 May 2024 (UTC)
- The problem is that the terms of use of this website require you to disclose that you are paid for your contributions. If you don't make that disclosure, you cannot edit. MarcGarver (talk) 15:55, 28 May 2024 (UTC)