User talk:Prokurator

Welcome

Hello Prokurator and welcome to Wikipedia! I am Ukexpat and I would like to thank you for your contributions.

Getting Started First steps • FAQ Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting help Community Portal • Help desk • Village Pump Where to ask questions or make comments • Request administrator attention Place {{helpme}} on your talk page and a small message explaining the problem The Commmunity Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists		Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Click here to reply to this message.

ukexpat (talk) 17:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Copyrighted material

Hello Prokurator, and welcome to Wikipedia. Your addition to International Swaps and Derivatives Association has had to be removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without permission from the copyright holder. While we appreciate your contributing to Wikipedia, there are certain things you must keep in mind about using information from your sources to avoid copyright or plagiarism issues here.

You can only copy/translate a small amount of a source, and you must mark what you take as a direct quotation with double quotation marks (") and a cited source. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners, for how to cite sources here.
Aside from limited quotation, you must put all information in your own words and structure, in proper paraphrase. Following the source's words too closely can create copyright problems, so it is not permitted here; see Wikipedia:Close paraphrasing. (There is a college level introduction to paraphrase, with examples, hosted by the Online Writing Lab of Purdue.) Even when using your own words, you are still, however, asked to cite your sources to verify information and to demonstrate that the content is not original research.
Our primary policy on using copyrighted content is Wikipedia:Copyrights. You may also want to review Wikipedia:Copy-paste.
In very rare cases (that is, for sources that are public domain or compatibly licensed), it may be possible to include greater portions of a source text. However, please seek help at the help desk before adding such content to the article. 99.9% of sources may not be added in this way, so it is necessary to seek confirmation first. If you do confirm that a source is public domain or compatibly licensed, you will still need to provide full attribution; see Wikipedia:Plagiarism for the steps you need to follow.
Also note that Wikipedia articles may not be copied without attribution. If you want to copy from another Wikipedia project or article, you can, but please follow the steps in Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia.

It's very important that contributors understand and follow these practices, as policy requires that people who persistently do not must be blocked from editing. If you have any questions about this, you are welcome to leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. --Drm310 (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, Prokurator. You have new messages at Ukexpat's talk page.
Message added 14:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

ukexpat (talk) 14:07, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You could also click on the signature button or located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when they said it. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 14:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Your addition to International Swaps and Derivatives Association 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 text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of article 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. PLEASE STOP OTHERWISE YOU WILL BE BLOCKED. ukexpat (talk) 14:37, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Persistent copyright infringement

You have now been reported for persistent copyright infringement, despite several warnings.--ukexpat (talk) 14:44, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for disruptive editing at International Swaps and Derivatives Association. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:48, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

If another editor objects to language that you're inserting into an article, you discuss the matter. I see that you asked what language ukexpat was objecting to, but you asked that AFTER you had reverted the article repeatedly. And that's disruptive editing, and a borderline Edit War. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:50, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Aaaaaand, I see from your comments at ukexpat's talk page that you work for the company - which means you really really can't edit the page at all due to Conflict of Interest. But list the inaccuracies here and I'll take a crack at it, if you like - we're all about accurate, neutral (and verifiable!) content. Once your block expires, you can post updated information on the article's talk page for other editors to work on, but you cannot in any way edit the main article. Further, we cannot accept text from ISDA's website or other copyrighted sources, no matter who gives permission. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 14:57, 1 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

question

How can I edit my page ISDA?

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, please place a new {{help me}} request on this page followed by your questions, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page.

Because I am associated with the organization, I have been asked to post proposed edits on this page. I have done so, but want to be sure that there is no violation of Wikipeidia rules. My page is ISDA and in history there is version of 14:47, 1 March 2013‎ which is correctly represent current state of the company. My organization is non-profit company. Thanks Prokurator (talk) 17:16, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for declaring your interest in International Swaps and Derivatives Association. Even with a non-profit company, the rules apply are at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and what you should do is described at Wikipedia:Best practices for editors with conflicts of interest - in brief, do not make changes directly but suggest them on the article talk page and let uninvolved users decide. Note that the Wikipedia:Verifiability policy requires that:"any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source."

Note also that Wikipedia requires a neutral point of view. This article is not a place for ISDA to promote itself or tell the world what it wants to say. What you wrote was promotional in tone, with unsupported adjectives of praise: "ISDA’s pioneering work... helped to significantly reduce credit and legal risk... a leader in promoting sound risk management practices... engages constructively with policymakers... strong commitment of the Association... " etc. The place for that sort of stuff is your own website, not an encyclopedia article - see also WP:Avoid mission statements. An encyclopedia article should be a description of the organization from outside, no opinions, just plain facts neutrally stated and cited to reliable sources. If there are factual inaccuracies, please state them on the article talk page. JohnCD (talk) 18:17, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sandbox

You can write a draft article in a "sandbox" page. If you can see a "Sandbox" link on the top line, just to the right of your username, click on that; if not, click on User:Prokurator/sandbox. Then you can make a request on the article talk page, including the code [[User:Prokurator/sandbox]] which will provide a link to it, and ask for someone to consider incorporating it, or parts of it, in the article.

Do not expect that it will all necessarily be used. I cannot stress enough that this is not your organization's page, it is Wikipedia's page about your organization. The COI rules are there because Wikipedia is extremely resistant to being used for any kind of promotion, and we find that people writing about themselves or their own concerns, despite their best intentions, find it difficult not to write in PR-speak and to address customers/members or potential customers. For some background, see User:JohnCD/Not a noticeboard.

When you write, keep in mind that you are not writing for the organization, you are writing for Wikipedia about the organization. Consider not what you want to tell the world, but what the reader of a general encyclopedia might want to know. The sort of detail appropriate for your members or potential members should stay on your website, where it is only a click away for those who want it. JohnCD (talk) 23:25, 4 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

March 2013

Hello, Prokurator. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people or things you have written about in the article International Swaps and Derivatives Association, be careful. People close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may make them mistakenly add overly-flattering or overly-disparaging content. So please read our plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Here's a partial summary of its advice:

Be transparent about your conflict of interest.
Do not edit articles about yourself, your business, or your competitors.
Post suggestions and sources on the article's talk page, or create a draft in your user space.
Your role is to summarize, inform and reference — not to promote, whitewash, or sell.
If writing a draft, write without bias, as if you don't work for the company or personally know the subject.
Have us review your draft.
Work with us and we'll work with you.

Please read the whole guide. See also our policies Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:Verifiability, and Wikipedia:Autobiography, which everyone must follow.

Thank you. Unforgettableid (talk) 04:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your sandbox draft

Oh dear. This is why we strongly discourage COI editing.

The first problem is that every single reference is to ISDA's own website. The essential criterion for having a Wikipedia article is called Wikipedia:Notability, and is not a matter of opinion but has to be demonstrated by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, Facebook, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and anything based on press releases. The test is, have people independent of the subject thought it significant enough to write substantial comment about? See WP:42 for what that means.

The advice given by a very experienced editor in User:Uncle G/On notability#Writing about subjects close to you is:

When writing about subjects that are close to you, don't use your own personal knowledge of the subject, and don't cite yourself, your web site, or the subject's web site. Instead, use what is written about the subject by other people, independently, as your sources. Cite those sources in your very first edit. If you don't have such sources, don't write.

Think about what an article written in that way would look like. You have toned down the promotional language, but the whole thing is still ISDA telling the world about itself and listing all its activities.

I do not have either time to inclination to do a rewrite, but I will make a post (tomorrow, I am out of time tonight) at WP:COI/N, the Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, which will bring other editors to help. Two useful things for you to do are:

Look for external references, substantial comment about ISDA written by people independent of it, to show notability.
List what is actually inaccurate or out-of-date on the current article.

Regards, JohnCD (talk) 00:43, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#International Swaps and Derivatives Association ‎. JohnCD (talk) 17:38, 9 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

John's analysis is correct. The article isn't supposed to tell us why the ISDA is good, but why they are notable. Remember, the article has to be written from a neutral point of view. The existing lead paragraph at ISDA is actually a pretty good example - it largely sticks to statements along the lines of "ISDA is X, ISDA does Y, etc..." The article does not get to state that what ISDA did was important and impactful and beneficial or whatever, as you do, but it could cite media coverage that highlights the importance of ISDA's activities.

For example, you have this line: "ISDA’s work in developing the ISDA Master Agreement and a wide range of related documentation materials, and in ensuring the enforceability of their netting and collateral provisions, has helped to reduce credit and legal risk." Instead, the line you need to have would be something like "The ISDA Master Agreement has been credited with reductions in legal risk in derivatives markets. [1][2]." You're not saying that they did that, you're saying that people have noted them for that. Then you provide sources that aren't the ISDA to show where people said that, so that readers can verify what was said. UltraExactZZ ^Said~ Did 12:15, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks everyone. All your comments are very much helpful.Prokurator (talk) 17:36, 11 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]