User talk:Jason Graves

December 2015

Welcome to Wikipedia. I saw that you edited or created Jason Graves, and I noticed that your username, "Jason Graves", may not comply with our username policy. Please note that you may not use a username that represents the name of a company, group, organization, product, or website. Examples of usernames that are not allowed include "XYZ Company", "MyWidgetsUSA.com", and "Trammel Museum of Art". However, you are invited to use a username that contains such a name if it identifies you personally, such as "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "Jack Smith at the XY Foundation", and "WidgetFan87".

Please also note that Wikipedia does not allow accounts to be shared by multiple people, and that you may not advocate for or promote any company, group, organization, product, or website, regardless of your username. Moreover, I recommend that you read our conflict of interest guideline. If you are a single individual and are willing to contribute to Wikipedia in an unbiased manner, please create a new account or request a change of username, by completing this form, that complies with our username policy. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. Meters (talk) 22:20, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Your username is not a problem if you are Jason Graves, but in that case you should not be editing the article about yourself. If that is the case please read WP:REALNAME and WP:COISELF. Meters (talk) 22:26, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed maintenance templates from Jason Graves. 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. 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. You are copying copyrighted material from Jason Grave's website into the Wikipedia article. If you are Jason Graves, as your username suggests, then the COI tag is warranted. If you are not Jason Graves, then your username is a violation of the username policy, and your contributions will be removed as copyright violations. Which is it? Meters (talk) 22:45, 7 December 2015 (UTC)

If you do not respond I will have to delete all of the material copied from http://www.jasongraves.com as a potential copyright violation. Meters (talk) 03:48, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

I've raised the issue at Wikipedia:OTRS_noticeboard since I'm not sure how to proceed. Meters (talk) 04:25, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Your addition to Jason Graves has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Per the discussion of the OTRS board. Meters (talk) 23:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. Meters (talk) 03:09, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia - discuss?

Hi Jason I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Your edits to date are all about, well Jason Graves. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, Jason Graves. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
• instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or 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 for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Comments and requests

Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do (and if you are paid, some things you need to do).

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. This seems pretty obvious, but would you please confirm that you are the subject of the article? Please note that if you are not him, you need to change your username due to the WP:IMPERSONATE policy. But do let me know. Then we can talk about how you should be editing, so that Wikipedia's integrity is protected. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 03:10, 21 February 2016 (UTC)

I left a message on the COI page, and emailed a wiki volunteer (who did not respond to previous attempts at communication). Yes, this is Jason Graves and the account is used by members of Jason Graves Music Inc, that I can confirm. Protecting Wikipedia's integrity is of the utmost importance to us, as is creating a detailed accurate page. Please can you advice on a solution to this problem, as right now the page is quite barren of any detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason Graves (talk • contribs) 18:00, 10 March 2016‎ (UTC)

Please note that it is a violation of Wikipedia's username policy to share an account for any reason. One and only one individual is allowed to edit with this account. Other users may make edits under their own separate accounts. --Drm310 (talk) 18:18, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Very much noted and taken into account. Jason Graves — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason Graves (talk • contribs) 18:25, 10 March 2016‎ (UTC)

Hi "Jason". I understand that your goal is to work on the Wikipedia article. Before that happens, we need to go over some things, and you need to do some things, OK? Just reply here, and we will work through this stuff. Jytdog (talk) 19:19, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

That is perfectly fine. First apologies for this taking a long time, I was unaware of the talk page and how to use it. As I said previously I was communicating with another volunteer through email but they were unresponsive. So yes lets get started, and thank you for your time. Jason Graves — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jason Graves (talk • contribs) 19:28, 10 March 2016‎ UTC)

Sorry, this page somehow fell off my watchlist. OK, the first thing is to sort out who is operating this account. Apparently several people have in the past. Only one person can operate it, so who will that be? Jytdog (talk) 08:37, 12 March 2016 (UTC)

It will be only myself. Jason Graves

OK great. I am assuming that "myself" = Jason Graves. If that is not true then please know that use of the account violates the WP:IMPERSONATE policy. OK, so assuming that you are indeed Jason, this means that you have a conflict of interest with regard to the article about you. What you should do now, is on your userpage, User:Jason Graves please add a disclosure, like this: "I am Jason Graves, and I have a conflict of interest with regard to the Jason Graves article." Just simple, not promotional. (you cannot use your userpage as a personal website -- it is just for communicating what you are up to here, to other Wikipedia editors. That is described in the WP:USERPAGE policy.) Please take care of that, and then we will move on to the next thing. Thanks. Jytdog (talk) 21:43, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

That is that done, as I am quite new to how things work in Wikipedia at this level, can you double check that on my user page? Just to be sure. Also my intention is to have an accurate wikipage that is not in anyway promotional, I already have my own website for that, and I do not want to compromise the integrity of the wiki page about me in anyway. Jason Graves

great. that is done. Thanks!! OK, now briefly, a note on how to use Talk pages, which are essential for everything that happens here. In Talk page discussions, we "thread" comments by indenting - when you reply to someone, you put a colon ":" in front of your comment, and the WP software converts that into an indent; if the other person has indented once, then when you are replying, you indent twice by putting two colons "::" which the WP software converts into two indents, and when that gets ridiculous you reset back to the margin (or "outdent") by putting this {{od}} in front of your comment. This also allows you to make it clear if you are also responding to something that someone else responded to if there are more than two people in the discussion; in that case you would indent the same amount as the person just above you in the thread. I hope that all makes sense. And at the end of the comment, please "sign" by typing exactly four (not 3 or 5) tildas "~~~~" which the WP software converts into a date stamp and links to your talk and user pages. OK? Jytdog (talk) 23:54, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Signing properly was going to be one first questions, as I could see a system was clearly in place but I was not completely sure of the exact requirements. So thank you for explaining that, this message and all future ones will finally be signed as required. :) Jason Graves (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

great. am going to open a new subsection for the next step in the COI management process.... Jytdog (talk) 17:55, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

peer review piece of COI management

OK, so as I noted above, there are two pieces to COI management in WP. The first is disclosure. The second is what I call "peer review". This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and viola there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no editors (in the real world sense of that term).

What we ask editors to do who have a COI and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft, disclose your COI on the Talk page using the appropriate template, and then submit the draft article through the WP:AFC process so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. You can make the edit request easily - and provide notice to the community of your request - by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at Talk:Jason Graves - there is a link at "click here" in that section -- if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want)

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content.

Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on the Jason Graves article or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. And if you want me to quickly go over the content policies, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 17:59, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I agree to the peer review process. This seems much better, I would much rather it was peer viewed so that the article would be fair, accurate and have longer term stability. Just as an example, would I click on 'Click here to start a new topic' (as you said), put in the text I want to use (say a Bio), we discuss it and once it meets the requirements it can then be posted? I want to get started soon and I just want to make sure my first step into this process is the correct one. I would also like to discuss some of the things that were taken down, such as the awards and nominations table, can I start that discussion there? Jason Graves (talk) 18:30, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Great - happy you agree to do that. And yes, that is how you would do it. But if you could hold on a sec... above I mentioned that all content in Wikipedia is governed by Wikipedia's content policies and guidelines, and other norms. It will save you and everybody else time, if you first take the time to understand them, so that what you propose complies with them. Can I walk you through that stuff quickly? Jytdog (talk) 18:33, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Yes, I would very much appreciate if you could, thank you Jason Graves (talk) 20:21, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

great, will do that in a new section. Jytdog (talk) 20:44, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Quickish rundown on how Wikipedia works

OK, so I would like to get you oriented to how Wikipedia works, and give you some advice about creating the article. There are some non-intuitive things about editing here, that I can zip through ~pretty~ quickly....

The first, is that our mission is to produce articles that provide readers with accepted knowledge, and to do that as a community that anyone can be a part of. That's the mission. As you can imagine, if this place had no norms, it would be a Mad Max kind of world interpersonally, and content would be a slag heap (the quality is really bad in parts, despite our best efforts). But over the past 15 years the community has developed a whole slew of norms, via loads of discussion. One of the first, is that we decide things by consensus. That decision itself, is recorded here: WP:CONSENSUS. (there is a whole forest of things, in "Wikipedia space" - pages in Wikipedia that start with "Wikipedia:AAAA" or for short, "WP:AAAA". WP:CONSENSUS is different from Consensus. See? And when we decide things by consensus, that is not just local, but includes meta-discussions that have happened in the past. Those are the norms. We call them policies and guidelines. There are policies and guidelines that govern content, and separate ones that govern behavior. Here is very quick rundown:

• WP:NOT (what WP is, and is not -- this is where you'll find the "accepted knowledge" thing - see also the WP:PROMO section)
• WP:OR - no original research is allowed here, instead
• WP:VERIFY - everything has to be cited to a reliable source (so everything in WP comes down to the sources you bring!)
• WP:RS is the guideline defining what a "reliable source" is for general content and WP:MEDRS defines what reliable sourcing is for content about health (please do read WP:RS so that the sources you bring when you make requests will be accepted by the community - this is the key thing that most new users fail to take into account) Please also do see WP:INDY - the strongest sources are independent of the subject of the article.
• WP:NPOV and the content that gets written, needs to be "neutral" (as we define that here, which doesn't mean what most folks think -- it doesn't mean "fair and balanced" - it means that the language has to be neutral, and that topics in a given article are given appropriate "weight" (space and emphasis). An article about a drug that was 90% about side effects, would give what we call "undue weight" to the side effects. We determine weight by seeing what the reliable sources say - we follow them in this too. So again, you can see how everything comes down to sources.
• WP:BLP - this is a policy specifically about articles about living people. We are very careful about these articles (which means enforcing the policies and guidelines above rigorously), since issues of legal liability can arise for WP, and people have very strong feelings about other people, and about public descriptions of themselves. You will also want to be sure to read this!
• WP:NOTABILITY - this is a policy that defines whether or not an article about X, should exist. What this comes down to is defined in WP:Golden rule - which is basically, are there enough independent sources about X, with which to build a decent article.

In terms of behavior, the key norms are:

• WP:CONSENSUS - already discussed
• WP:CIVIL - basically, be nice. This is not about being nicey nice, it is really about not being a jerk and having that get in the way of getting things done. We want to get things done here - get content written and maintained and not get hung up on interpersonal disputes. So just try to avoid doing things that create unproductive friction with other editors.
• WP:AGF - assume good faith about other editors. Try to focus on content, not contributor. Don't personalize it when content disputes arise. (the anonymity here can breed all kinds of paranoia)
• WP:HARASSMENT - really, don't be a jerk and follow people around, bothering them. And do not try to figure out who people are in the real world. Privacy is strictly protected by the WP:OUTING part of this policy. People are of course free to disclose their real world identities, as you have done.
• WP:DR - if you get into an argument with someone, try to work it. If you cannot, then use one of the methods described in WP:DR to get wider input from the community. It never has to come down to two people arguing.
• WP:TPG - this is about how to talk to other editors on Talk pages, like this one, or the one for the article about you: Talk:Jason Graves

If you can get all that (the content and behavior policies and guidelines) under your belt, you will become truly "clueful", as we say. If that is where you want to go, of course. I know that was a lot of information, but hopefully it is digestable enough. I will be happy to answer any questions you have. Jytdog (talk) 20:49, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much Jytdog you have been incredibly helpful, I will examine this thoroughly and will absolutely be referring back to it often. I will also learn much from doing, so I over the next few days/weeks I will get discussion going on my talk page before I post anything at all. Right now there is a great deal of work to do on it! I suspect I will still be asking a lot of questions, which will hopefully lead to the article being highly rule abiding and accurate. Jason Graves (talk) 22:06, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

Great! When you do make your proposal, please pay mind to how people respond. They might say things like "that is a WP:SPS and you can't use that source for that content". (in this case, WP:SPS is part of WP:RS that talks about when it is OK to use a "self published source" like a blog, and when it isn't). Those all caps links are to policies or guidelines that govern what we do. So please click the link and see what it says, think about it with regard to what you proposed, and if you don't understand, please just ask. Sometimes new editors start arguing before they really understand, and it just makes things harder for everybody. And new users can sometimes fall into what we call "wikilawyering" where they get all up into interpreting the words of the policy or guideline so they can "win", and miss the heart of the whole thing we are doing.

Anyway I have given you a lot to chew on and you have been wonderfully gracious. Thanks again for that. So... please feel free to ping me, anytime like you like. Good luck! Jytdog (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2016 (UTC)

That is very kind of you to say so! And likewise :P I will ping you if I am stuck on any issue, I feel that if I approach the discussions on the talk page with an open mind, decency and honesty, then they will be very fruitful and rewarding. I will get started over the next few days/weeks as I said, and will start posting on my Talk page to get the ball rolling. It will also be interesting to learn how things are done properly on Wikipedia, I am excited about that. Again thank you very much for the patience and for being so generous with your time Jason Graves (talk) 22:27, 15 March 2016 (UTC)