User talk:Wzkean

October 2024

Hello, I'm Cfls. I noticed that you recently removed content from Wenzhou–Kean University without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Cfls (talk) 20:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello, I'm Cfls. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Wenzhou–Kean University in which your edit summary did not appear to describe the change you made. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks.

Specifically, you removed the entire section about the university's academic freedom controversies, and added information about the university's academic departments to cover up the large-scale deletions of sourced content. In the edit summary, you only stated "Update the University Academics Information including majors and programs". This is a clearly misleading attempt to cover up the large-scale deletion of content with cited source information. This is not allowed on Wikipedia. Cfls (talk) 20:43, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello dear editor,

May I ask if you have the ability and qualifications to verify the authenticity of articles related to academic freedom? The relevant articles are just some comments published on the internet. If Wikipedia's freedom of speech is based on unfounded online articles, can I publish a comment on someone else's organization and then cite it? I also have a citation link, right?

Additionally, we believe that every organization have a competitor or has personnel with employment conflicts, are there records of arguments between each other at the bottom of each organization's page? This should be left to the law to solve, shouldn't it? Is it also free for an editor like(16:03, 5 April 2024 Jeonghwan.choi) in history to have their tenure revoked due to a large number of violations in school, and for those who engage in misconduct to modify Wikipedia with malicious intentions?

In addition, the content I added is based on facts, the majors offered by the school are not exaggerated, and the templates are the same as those of other schools. If we cannot include this information, can other schools also not include any introductions of the school?

please refer

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/New_York_University_Shanghai

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/University_of_Nottingham_Ningbo_China

Isn't it absurd that a school's introduction can only cite external articles without official website information?

Can I just post a school introduction in the media and cite it?

Or do you have a strong hostility towards our school yourself? If not, why don't you deal with other schools?

PS， Please don't bully us who are not good at English, thank you! Wzkean (talk) 01:31, 22 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

1. You may have WP:COI with the topic in question.

2. People may add information to the articles if they have WP:RS. The added content may include the school's response to these criticisms (WP:BALANCE).

3. Wikipedia articles should be WP:NOTADVERT or WP:NOPROMO.

4. Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED.

5. For controversies, people may add opinions from other parties including the accused party. WP:NPOV.

6. That being said, verifiability does not guarantee inclusion (WP:VNOT). You may gain WP:Consensus in Talk:Wenzhou–Kean University for the specific issues you are concerned about. The content in question may be removed after consensus is reached in Talk. Cfls (talk) 17:24, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello, Wzkean. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Wenzhou–Kean University, 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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Cfls (talk) 20:44, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

Hello Wzkean. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Wenzhou–Kean University, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Wzkean. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Wzkean|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Cfls (talk) 20:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]