Mrooney2017intern

Conflict of interest

Your username and the edits you have made to Kathryn Tappen including the images of her you have uploaded suggest that you have a conflict of interest in that you are employed by her or someone close to her and are making these edits as part of your work. If so you need to declare whether you have a conflict or are being paid to edit the article. Nthep (talk) 21:56, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Now I look at the content you added I've realised it almost entirely a copyright violation by cutting and pasting from here. You must understand that we cannot use copyrighted material and content must be written in your own words. You are ok to use the NBC bio as a source but you must write the content yourself. Please do not reinsert the deleted material in the same form. Nthep (talk) 18:46, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

And again. Please review our copyright policy. GAB^gab 20:36, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

And as you have finally confirmed with this edit that you do have a conflict of interest as you work with or for Kathryn, please try and understand why there is a COI policy and how you need to work within in that. Nthep (talk) 20:52, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Mrooney2017intern, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Mrooney2017intern! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like ChamithN (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 20:04, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Wikipedia and copyright

Hello Mrooney2017intern, and welcome to Wikipedia. All or some of your addition(s) to Kathryn Tappen have been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material without evidence of 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 cite the source using an inline citation. You can read about this at Wikipedia:Non-free content in the sections on "text". See also Help: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.
• If you own the copyright to the source you want to copy or are a designated agent, you may be able to license that text so that we can publish it here. However, there are steps that must be taken to verify that license before you do. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
• 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 or translated without attribution. If you want to copy or translate 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. —C.Fred (talk) 20:34, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

• Based on what you've described, you do not have authority to donate the material you have been attempting to add to the article. Any release would need to come from NBC Universal, since they are (holding themselves out as) the rightsholder of the text. Somebody from NBC Universal with a corporate email would need to email the Volunteer Response Team to make the donation. —C.Fred (talk) 21:11, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Not only a conflict of interest, but likely also a paid editing concern

Hello Mrooney2017intern. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to Mrooney2017intern. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a black hat practice.
Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.
Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Mrooney2017intern. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Mrooney2017intern|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, please do not edit further until you answer this message. Even an unpaid internship should probably be disclosed per the notice described above, since you're getting some benefits, even if not remuneration, from the internship. —C.Fred (talk) 20:56, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi - I am not being compensated directly.

"Minor" edits

Thank you for your contributions. Please mark your edits, such as your recent edits to Kathryn Tappen, as "minor" only if they are minor edits. In accordance with Help:Minor edit, a minor edit is one that the editor believes requires no review and could never be the subject of a dispute. Minor edits consist of things such as typographical corrections, formatting changes or rearrangement of text without modification of content. Additionally, the reversion of clear-cut vandalism and test edits may be labeled "minor". Thank you. Melcous (talk) 22:18, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Conflict of interest editing

As advised above, you have a clear conflict of interest in editing this article. You have said that you are not being compensated directly, but if this is something you are being asked to do as part of your internship, then the WP:PAID disclosure rules still apply. Either way, the best thing you can do is make any suggestions for changes to the article's talk page so neutral editors can have a look and decide if they meet wikipedia's core guidelines, rather than edit the article directly. The changes you recently made (which I have reverted) were not neutral and read more like a resume than an encyclopedia. For example, language like "With eight years of experience ...Tappen brings her in-depth knowledge" is never going to be ok here, and content like awards and achievements needs a reliable, independent source in order to be included. Thanks, Melcous (talk) 22:18, 26 July 2017 (UTC)

Blocked

I blocked your account for 3 days becaouse you engaged in illegitimate WP:MEATPUPPETRY with User:Wikitempm. Using two connected accounts to edit the same page is not allowed. Please, do not continue when the block expires. Vanjagenije (talk) 19:49, 28 July 2017 (UTC)