User talk:TransnationalLaw

July 2024

Hello, TransnationalLaw. We welcome your contributions, but it appears as if your primary purpose on Wikipedia is to add citations to sources you may be affiliated with.

Editing in this way is a violation of the policy against using Wikipedia for promotion and is a form of conflict of interest. The editing community considers excessive self-citing to be a form of spamming on Wikipedia (WP:REFSPAM); the edits will be reviewed and the citations removed where it was not appropriate to add them.

If you wish to continue contributing, please first consider citing other reliable secondary sources such as review articles that were written by other researchers in your field and that are already highly cited in the literature. If you wish to cite sources for which you may have a conflict of interest, please start a new section on the article's talk page and add {{Edit COI}} to ask a volunteer to review whether or not the citation should be added. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AntiDionysius,

I take issue with your comments and actions.

Firstly, you suggest that the citing of a particular journal article is promotional. The article to which you refer has been peer-reviewed and has been composed with a high degree of objectivity. It is a work of scholarship, and the sharing of such information thereafter is not an act of promotion of any kind. Your description as such is insulting.

Secondly, there is no rule against self-citation. There is only a rule against "excessive" self citation. The three citations to which you refer are far from excessive particularly given that the article is a rare example of academic work within the field of law that addresses the normative processes of European standardisation towards a circular economy (i.e. European Green Deal, industrial policies, plastic strategy, circular economy action plan). Moreover, prior to the addition of one of the citations there was even a request for such a citation on the relevant Wikipedia page.

Thirdly, the article to which you refer, addresses a number of important normative processes within the EU. The article grounds such processes within a well-established theoretical framework for law (ie. Llewellyn), thereby making an important contribution to legal scholarship pertaining to European standardisation.

Fourthly, the cited article was published with open access meaning that it is freely accessible to people to read and make up their own minds. The article is not behind a paywall, and there is no absolutely financial benefit derived through the reading, thinking about, liking, disliking, or citing the article etc.

Lastly, many Wikipedia pages could benefit from more citations from open source academic journals. If this involves some self-citation then it is worth it, especially in areas where there is a paucity of academic scholarship. TransnationalLaw (talk) 07:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to European Green Deal. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AntiDionysius,

I take issue with your comments and actions.

Firstly, you suggest that the citing of a particular journal article is promotional. The article to which you refer has been peer-reviewed and has been composed with a high degree of objectivity. It is a work of scholarship, and the sharing of such information thereafter is not an act of promotion of any kind. Your description as such is insulting.

Secondly, there is no rule against self-citation. There is only a rule against "excessive" self citation. The three citations to which you refer are far from excessive particularly given that the article is a rare example of academic work within the field of law that addresses the normative processes of European standardisation towards a circular economy (i.e. European Green Deal, industrial policies, plastic strategy, circular economy action plan). Moreover, prior to the addition of one of the citations there was even a request for such a citation on the relevant Wikipedia page.

Thirdly, the article to which you refer, addresses a number of important normative processes within the EU. The article grounds such processes within a well-established theoretical framework for law (ie. Llewellyn), thereby making an important contribution to legal scholarship pertaining to European standardisation.

Fourthly, the cited article was published with open access meaning that it is freely accessible to people to read and make up their own minds. The article is not behind a paywall, and there is no absolutely financial benefit derived through the reading, thinking about, liking, disliking, or citing the article etc.

Lastly, many Wikipedia pages could benefit from more citations from open source academic journals. If this involves some self-citation then it is worth it, especially in areas where there is a paucity of academic scholarship. TransnationalLaw (talk) 07:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at European Green Deal, you may be blocked from editing. AntiDionysius (talk) 12:42, 28 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi AntiDionysius,

I take issue with your comments and actions.

Firstly, you suggest that the citing of a particular journal article is promotional. The article to which you refer has been peer-reviewed and has been composed with a high degree of objectivity. It is a work of scholarship, and the sharing of such information thereafter is not an act of promotion of any kind. Your description as such is insulting.

Secondly, there is no rule against self-citation. There is only a rule against "excessive" self citation. The three citations to which you refer are far from excessive particularly given that the article is a rare example of academic work within the field of law that addresses the normative processes of European standardisation towards a circular economy (i.e. European Green Deal, industrial policies, plastic strategy, circular economy action plan). Moreover, prior to the addition of one of the citations there was even a request for such a citation on the relevant Wikipedia page.

Thirdly, the article to which you refer, addresses a number of important normative processes within the EU. The article grounds such processes within a well-established theoretical framework for law (ie. Llewellyn), thereby making an important contribution to legal scholarship pertaining to European standardisation.

Fourthly, the cited article was published with open access meaning that it is freely accessible to people to read and make up their own minds. The article is not behind a paywall, and there is no absolutely financial benefit derived through the reading, thinking about, liking, disliking, or citing the article etc.

Lastly, many Wikipedia pages could benefit from more citations from open source academic journals. If this involves some self-citation then it is worth it, especially in areas where there is a paucity of academic scholarship. TransnationalLaw (talk) 07:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I am not questioning the quality or calibre of the journal article in question. Nor am I saying that self-citation on Wikipedia is always bad, if it happens to be relevant. am saying that when the only thing you have done on Wikipedia is to add citations to this journal article on different pages - not to make any other edits or to cite journal articles by anyone else but yourself - it is difficult to interpret this as anything but self-promotion. In fact, I'm not saying that; Wikipedia policy is saying that. If you take issue with that you are welcome to try to get the policy changed, but as it stands, it is policy, so please follow it. Make some other edits. Thanks. AntiDionysius (talk) 09:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]