User talk:Tamara Santerra
Welcome![edit]
Hello, Tamara Santerra, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.
I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Ecolint, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.
To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.
One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)
In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.
Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- Best practices for editors with close associations
- Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Contributing to 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)
- Simplified Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk 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 {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Lard Almighty (talk) 13:21, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
AfC notification: Draft:Conrad Hughes has a new comment[edit]
Your submission at Articles for creation: Conrad Hughes has been accepted[edit]
Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.
The article has been assessed as Start-Class, which is recorded on its talk page. Most new articles start out as Stub-Class or Start-Class and then attain higher grades as they develop over time. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.
If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk. Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider .
Thanks again, and happy editing!
Superboilles (talk) 21:12, 24 August 2023 (UTC)Potential COI[edit]
Tamara Santerra, you appear to have a very strong connection to Michael D. Aeschliman, and your account appears to be a single purpose account. Please provide a statement here that you have no WP:COI and/or are not the subject himself.174.208.235.142 (talk) 18:02, 27 April 2024 (UTC)
Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 13:57, 30 May 2024 (UTC)- I have no COI with the article in question (Michael D. Aeschliman), and of course I am not the subject of the article! Neither has the subject of the article ever approached me concerning it. I have been operating in good faith, and there is nothing personally at stake for me in this article. For professional reasons, I happen to be well informed about the subject, and I have therefore tried to ensure that it is thoroughly covered, with as many facts and valid citations as possible. However, I am not a member of any organization or institution connected with the subject of the article.
- Was the amount of information included in the article excessive, in view of the subject's notability? This can be discussed or questioned by other bona fide editors, and I learn from their corrections.
- However, on several occasions the article in question was edited with an evidently hostile intention by someone who vandalized it (removing most of its contents indiscriminately) and ridiculed the subject by labelling him as an "inkeeper and B&B owner", when his status as a professor and intellectual of some stature is abundantly documented.
- The controversy regarding this matter has attracted the attention of other, serious editors who have rightly or wrongly confirmed most of the deletions, suspecting that I am a sockpuppet. I am not; but I now understand this concept, and why corrective action or blocking in such cases may be necessary. I also understand the need to be more circumspect, sober and restrained in my editing. But a specialist's interest in a subject to which she or he is contributing (perhaps, in the eyes of some other, more experienced editors, excessively) should not be sanctioned with a permanent blockage, when the contributions were reasonably substantiated and made in good faith. Tamara Santerra (talk) 18:09, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Greetings. For admin consideration, please accurately and fully state your relationship with the International School of Geneva. You've been socking mainly on two WP:BLPs, and the school appears to be the commonality. JFHJr (㊟) 22:16, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
- Also: same as to Conrad Hughes, please. Are you the subject? If not, please explain your connection to that subject and the school. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 22:37, 30 May 2024 (UTC)