If you are connected to someone or something you have written about (a few examples are writing about yourself, your business, your band, a member of your family, your client) then you should be aware that Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline discourages you from writing about that subject. The main reason for that is that experience over the years indicates that editors with such a connection to a subject they are writing about are likely to find it very difficult, or even impossible, to stand back from their writing and see how it will look from the detached perspective of an outsider, so that they are likely to write in ways that look promotional to others, even if they sincerely think they are writing in a neutral way. Also, if your editing forms all or part of work for which you are paid, whether as an employee, as a contractor, or in any other capacity, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require you to state who is paying you, and what your connection to them is. JBW (talk) 20:00, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HagHagis, welcome to Wikipedia and thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia, such as Hagsphotograph (talk · contribs). Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this, and users who misuse multiple accounts may be blocked from editing. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please disclose these connections. Thank you. Cabayi (talk) 08:34, 3 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Cabayi, Thank you for pointing this out. I have now corrected this inadvertent use of multiple accounts as I explained here. Many thanks for your assistance HagHagis

Hello Doogie57. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. 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 serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

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. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged 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, broadly construed, 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:Doogie57. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Doogie57|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. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. MrOllie (talk) 13:09, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello MrOllie, Thank you for your message.

I am not being directly or indirectly being paid for my edits in any way.

I trust this will clear up your concerns.

Best wishes Doogie57 (talk) 17:34, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Promoting your own website and/or your work on Wikipedia is covered. You've got to stop doing that. MrOllie (talk) 17:44, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I am sorry that you view this as promoting my own website. I did not think of it like that.

On the ‘Combination Printing’ page there was a talk topic requesting examples of such work asking if anybody had created any. This led me to post the picture as I am the copyright holder so am able to contribute that image to the commons. In that process the source of the image as a url is requested. I am trying to add accurate experienced information on the subject which was my intention and not self promotion. If I made a mistake in how I uploaded the image by including my web site would you please advise. I will not be adding any further images.

I am new to this but understand that Wiki is about independent un- biased facts.

I trust this answers your concerns. Doogie57 (talk) 18:42, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]