User talk:Proper education

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Proper education, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Global concrete polishing institute, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! 331dot (talk) 11:09, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you recently removed maintenance templates from Global concrete polishing institute. When removing maintenance templates, please be sure to either resolve the problem that the template refers to, or give a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Please see Help:Maintenance template removal for further information on when maintenance templates should or should not be removed. If this was a mistake, don't worry, as your removal of this template has been reverted. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia, and if you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 11:13, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, Proper education. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Global concrete polishing institute, 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 which forms all or part of work 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. 331dot (talk) 11:25, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Also please note that your word is not sufficient as a reliable source, as anyone on the Internet can claim to be any person. Social media accounts are also not considered reliable sources (and are not independent) as they are user-editable and can say whatever the account holder wants. Please review what reliable sources are by clicking this link. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

for user 331

Please do not bite the newcomers[edit source] Understand that newcomers are both necessary for and valuable to the community. By helping newcomers, we can increase the range of knowledge, perspectives, and ideas on Wikipedia, thereby preserving its neutrality and integrity as a resource and ultimately increasing its value. In fact, it has been found that newcomers are responsible for adding the majority of lasting content to Wikipedia (i.e., substantive edits); while insiders and administrators are responsible for a large bulk of total edits, these often involve tweaking, reverting, and rearranging content.[1] Remember, our motto and our invitation to the newcomer is be bold. We have a set of rules, standards, and traditions, but they must not be applied in such a way as to thwart the efforts of newcomers who take that invitation at face value. A newcomer brings a wealth of ideas, creativity and experience from other areas that, current rules and standards aside, have the potential to better our community and Wikipedia as a whole. It may be that the rules and standards need revising or expanding; perhaps what the newcomer is doing "wrong" may ultimately improve Wikipedia. Observe for a while and, if necessary, ask what the newcomer is trying to achieve before concluding that their efforts are wanting or that they are simply "wrong". If a newcomer seems to have made a small mistake (e.g., forgetting to put book titles in italics), try to correct it yourself: do not slam the newcomer. A gentle note at their user page explaining the Wikipedia standard and how to achieve it in the future may prove helpful, as they may be unfamiliar with the norm or merely how to achieve it. Remember, this is a place where anyone may edit and therefore it is each person's responsibility to edit and complement, rather than to criticize or supervise others. If you use bad manners or curse at newcomers, they may decide not to contribute to the encyclopedia again. If you feel that you must say something to a newcomer about a mistake, please do so in a constructive and respectful manner. Begin by introducing yourself with a greeting on the user's talk page to let them know that they are welcome here, and present your corrections calmly and as a peer. If possible, point out things that they've done correctly or well. Remind newcomers that their edit histories are usually saved, both at the article page history and a list of user contributions associated with their user name or IP address if still unregistered. When their edits are reverted, they may panic, start an edit war, or leave Wikipedia entirely, mistakenly assuming that hours of work have been irretrievably deleted. Please gently let newcomers know that their work can be retrieved from the history unless it has been deleted. Inform them that they are able to negotiate with other editors on talk pages. If all else fails, they can request undeletion of the articles that they have edited. Newcomers may be hesitant to make changes, especially major ones, such as NPOV-ing and moving, due to fear of damaging Wikipedia (or of offending other Wikipedians and being flamed or being blocked). Teach them to be bold. While it is fine to point a new user who has made a mistake towards the relevant policy pages, it is both unreasonable and unfriendly to suggest that they stop taking part in votes, Articles for Deletion discussions, etc., until they "gain more experience." This both discourages new editors and deprives Wikipedia of much-needed insights. When giving advice, tone down the rhetoric a few notches from the usual Wikipedia norm. Make the newcomer feel genuinely welcome, not as though they must win your approval in order to be granted membership into an exclusive club. Any new domain of concentrated, special-purpose human activity has its own specialized structures, which take time to learn (and which benefit from periodic re-examination and revision). Do not call newcomers disparaging names such as "sockpuppet" or "meatpuppet." You can point them to those policies if there is valid cause to do so. For example, if a disproportionate number of newcomers show up on one side of a vote, you should make them feel welcome while explaining that their votes may be disregarded if it violates basic policies regarding content. No name-calling is necessary. Similarly, think hard before calling a newcomer a single-purpose account. Besides, it is discouraged to label any editor with such invidious titles during a dispute (see Wikipedia:Don't call a spade a spade). Sometimes users forget to use four tildes after talk page posts. You can make the reminder process easier and less annoying by using the following two templates. In the meantime, you can use — Preceding unsigned comment added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}#top|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]) to fix those anonymous comments. Template:Sign1 – Please sign your name using four tildes (Proper education (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2017 (UTC)) when making your posts on talk pages. Template:Sign2 – When editing on User Talk or Article Talk pages, please sign your name using four tildes (Proper education (talk) 11:40, 27 May 2017 (UTC)) when making your posts. I would also suggest that you consider creating an account for yourself. There are some times when users add in new discussions to talk pages, despite the discussions already being ongoing. Often, the newcomers wouldn't be aware that there has already been a discussion on the topic, even if it is very recent guide them with it. Assume good faith on the part of newcomers. They most likely want to help out. Give them a chance! Experience or associated privileges from the same shouldn't be misguidedly interpreted as a means for default acquiescence from other members and no Wikipedian is above an other Wikipedian. But some actions might appear to a newcomer as not, editors who exercise this privileges should provide unambiguous clarity to them on basis of policies, this is a sign of a responsible editor. Remember Hanlon's Razor. Behavior that appears malicious might be from ignorance of our expectations and rules. Even if you are 100% sure that someone is a worthless, no-good Internet troll, vandal, or worse, conduct yourself as if they are not. Remember that the apparent test editors have the potential to be tomorrow's editors. By giving a polite, honest and noncondemning answer to newcomers, you have the opportunity to teach them Wikipedia policy. By being calm, interested, and respectful, you do credit to your dignity, and to our project. It is polite to point out to newcomers little details about editing on Wikipedia, such as the fact that one can sign one's name on userpages by leaving four of the tilde symbols (~), or pointing out that a wikilink can be achieved by putting double square brackets around a word or phrase. Remember that you too were once a newcomer. Treat others as you were treated (or, perhaps, wish you had been treated) when you first arrived. Remember: "Don't bite, do what's right. Being a friend is all right." How to avoid being a "biter"[edit source] Newcomers' ideas of how things should be handled within Wikipedia will largely be out of context. It's a jungle in Wikipedia, and it may take some time before a newcomer becomes accustomed to how things work here. Keeping that in mind may help you avoid becoming a "biter". To avoid being accused of biting, try to:[reply]

Avoid intensifiers in commentary (e.g., exclamation points and words like terrible, dumb, stupid, bad, etc.). Moderate your approach and wording. Always explain reverts in the edit summary, and use plain English rather than cryptic abbreviations. Avoid sarcasm in edit summaries and on talk pages, especially when reverting. Strive to respond in a measured manner. Wait and postpone editing as soon as you feel that you're upset. Be gracious. Acknowledge differing principles and be willing to reach a consensus. Take responsibility for resolving conflicts. Reciprocate where necessary. Listen actively. Avoid excessive Wikipedia jargon. When linking to policies or guidelines, do so in whole phrases, not wiki shorthand. Avoid using blocks as a first resort. Consider talking to a user before you block them. Avoid deleting newly created articles, as inexperienced authors might still be working on them or trying to figure something out. Even the most well written and helpful deletion template message may seem frightening or unwelcome to new users. Consider writing a personalised message. Standard welcome/warning messages are both cordial and correcting. Consider using these templates for welcoming, or the first two here for warning.

Strive to be a responsible Wikipedian. By fostering goodwill, you will neither provoke nor be provoked easily, and will allow new Wikipedians to devote their time and resources towards building a truly collaborative encyclopedia.

Please note that personal attacks are not permitted. I am happy to help you in any way but you have not responded to my comments. There are serious conflict of interest issues here that need to be addressed as well as issues with the article itself. Further, if you are paid to be the director of the organization you are writing about, you are required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use to comply with the paid editing policy and declare such status. 331dot (talk) 11:44, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017[edit]

Please do not remove Articles for deletion notices from articles or remove other people's comments in Articles for deletion pages, as you did with Global concrete polishing institute. Doing so won't stop the discussion from taking place. You are, however, welcome to comment about the proposed deletion on the appropriate page. Thank you. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You are free to "inspect" my posts, I have nothing to hide. Instead of personal attacks and hostility(which is surprising coming from a director of an organization) I hope you are able to work with me to better understand Wikipedia guidelines and policies to achieve a result that we all want. 331dot (talk) 11:48, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove an Articles for deletion notice or a comment from an AfD discussion, as you did at Global concrete polishing institute. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 11:52, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 31 hours for persistently making disruptive edits. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Widr (talk) 11:57, 27 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]