User talk:Youronto

June 2019

Hello, I'm Susmuffin. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Jamil Jivani have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the help desk. ―Susmuffin ^Talk 23:45, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Youronto. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Jamil Jivani, 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 organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
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 WP:PAID.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted.

You are advised not to edit your boss' page, as you will find it difficult to write from a neutral point of view. ~~ OxonAlex - talk 18:25, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why was my first post edited in the first place?

Okay, everything said about managing a conflict of interest makes sense. However, this was not the reason why my first post about Jamil Jivani was taken down in the first place. Can you tell me why?

"First unencyclopedic entry by what appears to be a disruptive editor: Assume good faith. Do not attack the author who you suspect is disruptive. However, revert uncited or unencyclopedic material. Use an edit summary which describes the problem in non-inflammatory terms. Stay very civil. Post to talk page asking for discussion and/or sources. Consult Do not bite the newcomers, and be aware that you may be dealing with someone who is new and confused, rather than a problem editor".

This is from Wikipedia's guidelines? How am I supposed to learn from the specific mistakes if there was no actual summary attached to the decision to revert my changes? That's not fair. My citations were in the document. What else was wrong with it? Youronto (talk) 18:56, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This really isn't complicated.

This is what the article looked like before you edited it.
This is what you changed it to.

Literally the only thing that was improved by that edit was the section breaks, although not even all of that was done right. (there's no section break with the subject in bold at the beginning of articles, the software automatically displays the page title in bold above the text)

The existing references, all 27 of them, were replaced with 14 improperly formatted refs. That alone is enough to revert it. You also removed all six pertinent categories from the page for no apparent reason, again, in of itself enough to justify a revert.

It's usually not a good idea to completely rewrite a stable article in one single edit unless you really know what you are doing. Like, I've been doing this for 12 years and I wouldn't even try something like that, so doing it as your very first edit was overreaching. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:41, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Your help desk question

In case there is any information not covered in the above topics, the response is here.— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 20:19, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]