User talk:JanVetchy

Hello, JanVetchy. 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, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the 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 which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 20:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Deli nk (talk) 20:22, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reply

Thank you for your message on my talk page. You should read through wikipedia's guidelines on neutrality and referencing for starters. At the moment, the article reads like a promotional brochure for the artist's work.

For example in the lead section, phrases like "Díaz has used new media to reveal immaterial aspects of everyday reality of our natural environment which are elusive through primary human senses" and "Díaz is addressing issues of anthropocene, accelerationism, chronopolitics and advancements in the fields of virtual reality and augmented reality with a help of fictional narrative" (which is sourced only to his own work!) are "puffery".
Wikipedia relies on neutral content that has been soured to reliable, secondary sources, i.e. what other people have said about a subject, not what they have said about themselves.
Under the section Work you have whole paragraphs that are promotional in tone and sourced only to the artist's own work, such as "For Díaz, science is not a mere aesthetic backdrop; he attributes importance to it as a framework of understanding. He is a pure humanist scientist, a methodical observer of modern man, in whom and for whom he attempts to unveil the things that we, overloaded by technology, are ceasing or have ceased to notice. It is paradoxical, yet entirely logical that to uncover what has been lost, he uses the very cutting-edge technology that tends to distance us from our very selves. As a techno-optimist, Díaz is sending out a clear signal: it is possible to accept a machine as the closest tool to the human soul not just as an extended arm, but rather as a much more substantially extended soul." This is not how wikipedia works.
Please also note that if you are connected to Díaz in real life then you have a conflict of interest which you should disclose and then follow those guidelines carefully. Thank you, Melcous (talk) 23:37, 6 June 2017 (UTC)[reply]