User talk:Morganeason

Welcome!

Hello, Morganeason, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Whpq (talk) 21:19, 8 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

CoI policy[edit]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article ATG Stores, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. Brianhe (talk) 01:55, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Brianhe. Thank you for your feedback. Do you feel I have violated any of Wikipedia's policies or guidelines in writing this article? I believe the guidelines state that any article my be created by any use as long as the content is kept neutral. I am new here so please help me out with constructive feedback if you have on my article. I've recieved help from Orangemike who describes himself as a "deletionist" and after some help from him he was ok with the article. The article also recieved help from Whpq and he/she seemed to appericate the citations in it. Thank you very much, Morganeason (talk) 03:44, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The answer to your question is found at WP:BFAQ. Essentially, working on an article about a business in which you have interest is considered a conflict of interest for Wikipedia. It is not strictly forbidden, but has some pretty strict guidelines around it and is strongly discouraged. -- Brianhe (talk) 04:18, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The ATG Stores article meets the critera of Neutral Point of View, Verifiability and Notability. If you feel it doesn't meet any of these guidelines please edit the article itself or provide constructive feedback as to how I can. If you feel I've violated a specific policy of Wikipedia please provide verification and I will do my best to correct my wrong doing. If this is not the case I would appericate it if you would remove your warnings about conflict of interest on my talk page as your comments have had a very negative impact on my first day on Wikipedia. Morganeason (talk) 05:24, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

June 2009[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, we would like to remind you not to attack other editors, as you did on User talk:Brianhe. Please comment on the contributions and not the contributors. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. --Orange Mike | Talk 16:36, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Orangemike, thank you for being kind to a new editor. My tone in my response to Brainhe was much more negative then it should be. I will edit my request on his talk page following your guidance. Thank you for your help and support. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Morganeason (talk • contribs)

NPOV[edit]

Hi, Morganeason! Thank you for sending me a message. It's always good to see new users interested in making articles meet Wikipedia's policies. I notice that some other users have spoken to you about about policies on CoI, so I know you're familiar with that rigmarole and don't need to mention it to you. Now, the thing is, it's very hard to pin down in concrete terms the tone of an article. In this case, my concern is not at all with you writing an article while being employed, but rather the exultatory tone that the article approaches the company with. Editors should aim for the moon, so even if they miss they end up among the stars. Specifically, on a cursory read of the article, one notes that the presence of overwhelmingly positive phrases. That is not to say that you can't have positive or 'worthy' phrases in an article, but they should be kept to a minimum. The standard that Wikipedia uses is 'neutral point of view', (whose article is at WP:NPOV).

Now, generally marks that set off a flag in my head for a company's article is an excessive focus on figures, awards, and attention paid to roundaboutly touting the quality of their goods/services. For a couple articles that (in my opinion, just as an editor) do the job without writing with a vested or interested POV, check the articles for the following companies out. Arctic Cat provides a good history of the company without spending too much time on how wonderful the company is, my only objection to the article is the long and unnecessary lists of products. A good brief article would be that of Hughes Communications.

For an example of an article that I think reads like an advertisement, look at Goldleaf Financial Solutions. Take note of the 'business jargon' that the article is prettied up with. It reads nicely, but is ultimately mostly meaningless and reads more like a press release than an encyclopedia article. The same is true of the article for the Kirin Brewing Company, which (as you can see from its extremely lengthy history section) contains probably far more information than is needed. By any means, I hope I've been able to help! I'd be more than happy to help edit or give any opinion you might be interested in if you'd like to further contact me. Thank you, and happy editing! :) --Kuzaar^-T-C- 18:25, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

LOL! Well thank you for your very polite and informative message. I appreciate you not linking in the CoI policy for me to read again. :-) I must admit I'm not much of a writer myself. I just saw the articles on CSN Stores and NetShops and thought "hey these guys are similar sized business with a similar business model" and maybe if people were interested in those companies they would be interested in ATG Stores as well. How would you feel if I just removed the awards section. I know the article would still be fluffier then it could be but that might make it less like an advertisement. Would that be enough of an improvement for you to remove your advertisement banner? Thank you very much for your sincere help -- Morganeason (talk) 18:59, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Morganeason, I'm happy to help! If I were you, I might condense the awards section down into a sentence or two and incorporate it into the section above it. You might also work a little on the tone of said above section, but that's good thinking. If you end up working the article over a little bit, I certainly don't think it would be amiss to remove the advert flag from the top of the article- it's just advice to editors concerned with the content of the article. I agree that with the number of cited sources about the company that it seems appropriate at least to have an article. Independent coverage is almost universally an indicator of notability, which is the prime metric of whether or not a subject should have an article. Let me know if there's anything else I might help with! --Kuzaar^-T-C- 19:17, 9 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions Kuzaar. I have updated the page and hopefuly changed the tone to be less of an advertisment. If you have a second to take a look and you agree please remove the advertisment tag. Thank you so much for taking the time to help me. - Morganeason (talk) 04:25, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Morganeason, I've tweaked a couple questionable sentences and removed the advert tag. I think with the current edits undertaken, it reads much more neutrally and factually. Thanks for your effort! :) --Kuzaar^-T-C- 13:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for all you help Kuzaar

NEW CATEGORY PAGE[edit]

Hello Washington-user!! What do you think of this category?
Either on a scale of 1-10 or with commentary.
Let me know through the "Special:EmailUser/" section. #TTiT# 11:19, 14 August 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by The-Traveller-in-Tacoma (talk • contribs)