69:
23:
91:
content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about
73:
44:. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on
145:
of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.
77:
127:
88:
81:
40:, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Knowledge with an
106:
articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
149:
93:
135:
131:
126:
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to
41:
53:
45:
76:
your contributions to
Knowledge, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things
148:
For information on how to contribute to
Knowledge when you have a conflict of interest, please see
92:
that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by
157:
99:
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
49:
31:
27:
139:
113:
153:
112:
to the
Knowledge article or website of your organization in other articles (see
161:
68:
57:
122:
so that you do not accidentally breach
Knowledge's content policies.
104:
Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating
30:. I noticed that you recently removed some content from
36:
87:
All editors are required to comply with
Knowledge's
150:our frequently asked questions for organizations
96:and writing with as little bias as possible.
8:
7:
84:or close connection to the subject.
14:
67:
21:
1:
80:on Knowledge, you may have a
58:16:16, 31 December 2014 (UTC)
162:14:15, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
132:verifiability of information
177:
138:. Note that Knowledge's
120:Exercise great caution
78:you have written about
72:Hello, Bernparks2. We
128:neutral point of view
89:neutral point of view
82:conflict of interest
143:require disclosure
168:
94:reliable sources
71:
39:
32:Bernard C. Parks
25:
24:
176:
175:
171:
170:
169:
167:
166:
165:
136:autobiographies
65:
35:
22:
19:
12:
11:
5:
174:
172:
124:
123:
117:
114:Knowledge:Spam
107:
64:
61:
18:
15:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
173:
164:
163:
159:
155:
152:. Thank you.
151:
146:
144:
141:
137:
133:
129:
121:
118:
115:
111:
110:Avoid linking
108:
105:
102:
101:
100:
97:
95:
90:
85:
83:
79:
75:
70:
62:
60:
59:
55:
51:
47:
43:
38:
33:
29:
17:December 2014
16:
147:
142:
140:terms of use
125:
119:
109:
103:
98:
86:
66:
63:January 2015
46:my talk page
42:edit summary
20:
50:KylieTastic
28:KylieTastic
26:Hello, I'm
48:. Thanks.
37:this edit
154:Melcous
74:welcome
134:, and
34:with
158:talk
54:talk
160:)
130:,
116:).
56:)
156:(
52:(
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
