User talk:Becca33

Hello, Branding by Becca, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Draft:Bobbi Pickard, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's content policies and may not be retained. In short, the topic of an article must be notable and have already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Please review Your first article for an overview of the article creation process. The Article Wizard is available to help you create an article, where it will be reviewed and considered for publication. For information on how to request a new article that can be created by someone else, see Requested articles. If you are stuck, come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can help you through the processes.

New to Wikipedia? Please consider taking a look at our introductory tutorial or reviewing the contributing to Wikipedia page to learn the basics about editing. Below are a few other good pages about article creation.

• Article development
• Standard layout
• Lead section
• The perfect article
• Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing? Go here.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, ask me on my talk page. You can also type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! Wikishovel (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Draft:Bobbi Pickard, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to be an unambiguous copyright infringement of https://uk.linkedin.com/in/bobbipickard. (See section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images taken from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites or other printed material as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.
  If the external website or image belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text or image — which means allowing other people to use it for any reason — then you must verify that externally by one of the processes explained at Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. The same holds if you are not the owner but have their permission. If you are not the owner and do not have permission, see Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for how you may obtain it. You might want to look at Wikipedia's copyright policy for more details, or ask a question here.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Wikishovel (talk) 14:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Branding by Becca. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Bobbi_Pickard, 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 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 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:Branding by Becca. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Branding by Becca|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. Qcne (talk) 14:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

No I do not have a financial stake in this. I can't seem to contest the speedy deletion, can you help?

Thank you! Branding by Becca (talk) 14:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Branding by Becca unfortunately we cannot accept copyrighted work, so it was correctly deleted. If you would like to submit it again, please ensure the contents is paraphrased from reliable secondary sources.

I just also want to double check, your username Branding by Becca suggests you may work in PR? Qcne (talk) 15:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can I ask what is copyrighted? Branding by Becca (talk) 16:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Most of the content of the draft was taken from [1]https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobbipickard which is, presumably, written by Bobbi and therefore copyrighted by her. Qcne (talk) 16:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The website Branding by Becca lists Trans in the City as one of its clients, and Trans in the City lists Bobbi Pickard as its CEO. Are you not associated with Branding by Becca? Valereee (talk) 16:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nice detective work.

@Branding by Becca it's not nice to lie about your undisclosed financial stake in promoting Bobbi Pickard.

It is also a breach of the Wikimedia Terms and Conditions to partake in paid editing without making a mandatory paid editing disclosure, as stated above. Further edits will lead to your account being blocked if you do not disclose both your paid editing status and your conflict of interest. Qcne (talk) 16:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

This is separate from Trans in the City, I would disclose if I had financial gain in this :)

In all honesty just finding the system a little difficult to navigate! I.e I am unsure how to disclose conflict of interest? Branding by Becca (talk) 16:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can disclose by following instructions at WP:PAID. But if they're a client of your firm, you're being paid by them. That is paid editing. Valereee (talk) 16:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can assure you, this does not link with any paid work I do.

Thank you for your help - it would be great for you to offer more of the community spirit before jumping to conclusions :) Branding by Becca (talk) 17:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BbB, I'm sorry, but I'm having a hard time not connecting the two when your literal first edit is to create an article about a person who heads an organization by whom you are paid. It kind of defies credulity. At the absolute minimum, with all the assumption of good faith in the world, you have a profound COI. Valereee (talk) 17:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A lot of the work I do is voluntary.

I look up to the subject of this as a role model, hence why I was trying to set up this page :)

Yes - which is why I asked for advice on declaring the conflict of interest above as this did not appear for me when setting up the page Branding by Becca (talk) 17:13, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Everyone on wikipedia is a volunteer. Literally we have no paid employees, none. I'm here spending my own volunteer time and energy trying to help you understand how Wikipedia works.

It doesn't actually matter that this specific task is voluntary on your part. That organization pays you; this is considered paid editing even if the organization is not paying you to create the article about their CEO. If you work for an organization, even if your job description doesn't include PR, writing about them here on Wikipedia is considered paid editing. Period. Valereee (talk) 17:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help. I think my choice of username confused matters! I will attempt to do this again Branding by Becca (talk) 17:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think anyone is confused, but you can request a user name change at WP:UNC. Valereee (talk) 17:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you - I will continue with this account name :) Branding by Becca (talk) 18:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I would strongly recommend changing it, as it's a violation of WP:ORGNAME. The likely outcome to not changing it is that the account will be blocked until you do request the name change. Valereee (talk) 18:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh that's good to know, thank you! I had a message pop up that my IP address is blocked, but I believe I can still edit so not sure what is going on Branding by Becca (talk) 18:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Welp, looks like another admin got tired of you not listening to me. I tried. Valereee (talk) 18:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Bobbi Pickard, requesting that it be deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under two or more of the criteria for speedy deletion, by which pages can be deleted at any time, without discussion. If the page meets any of these strictly defined criteria, then it may soon be deleted by an administrator. The reasons it has been tagged are:

• It seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. (See section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.
• It appears to be about a person, organization (band, club, company, etc.), individual animal, or web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. (See section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion.) Such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 18:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Branding by Becca. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Bobbi Pickard, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

• avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template);
• disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
• avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
• do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Annh07 (talk) 18:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely because your username is a clear violation of Wikipedia's username policy – it is obviously offensive, profane, violent, threatening, sexually explicit, disruptive, attacks or impersonates another person, or suggests that you do not intend to contribute positively to Wikipedia. Please see our blocking and username policies for more information.

We invite everyone to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, but users are not allowed to edit with accounts that have inappropriate usernames, and we do not tolerate 'bad faith' editing such as trolling or other disruptive behavior. If you believe that this block was incorrect or made in error, or would otherwise like to explain why you should be unblocked, you are welcome to appeal this block – read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the following text to the bottom of your user talk page: {{unblock-un|new username|your reason here ~~~~}} ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• I was initially going to give you a softer block, but there are several things here that concerns me:

Your draft was tagged and deleted as promotional. You were warned about how this all looked and sounded. Your next action was to create a live article. I do see where you were trying, but you still chose to bypass creating a draft and the Articles for Creation process.

You were also warned that your username comes across as promotional and a violation of the username guidelines, as it comes across as being representative of a company and not as an individual person. Despite getting a very clear warning from Valereee that this could result in a block, you stated that you were going to keep your username.

I don't hate COI editors. I've been a COI editor, back when I was volunteering for my state library. The main things I look for with COI editors are transparency and the willingness to learn and be cautious of Wikipedia's guidelines. I'll be honest: the Wikipedia community is not often kind towards COI editors, regardless of their intent or who they are representing. As such, it's just intensely important to follow guidelines as closely as possible, to the point where you might adhere to them even more closely than your average non-COI editor. Even now I make sure to edit the state library page very carefully, even though I haven't been a volunteer there for almost a decade.

I'm willing to unblock, but you will need to show that more of a willingness to follow guidelines. If not, then I'll be honest: it would be better to just wait for someone else to create pages for anyone you're trying to add to Wikipedia. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:41, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there,

I think my lack of understanding of this website is leading to issues here, for that I apologise - and I am more than willing to follow guidelines.

I had a message saying I was blocked, but it then disappeared - so I tried to create a new page to see if I still had access. I was also trying to see if anything popped up for COI that I had missed before.

Regarding my username, once informed it would result in a block I went off to change it - got distracted - came back and I was blocked.

Willing to make any necessary changes to build the page :) Branding by Becca (talk) 18:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So, Becca, while you're blocked, it's important you use your talk page only to discuss the process for getting unblocked. See WP:TPA. Things get even more complicated if you lose talk page access.

I'm going to ask other admins to give me a tiny bit of room, here. This editor did actually make completely unrelated edits after creating the COI article, which to me says they may actually be someone who could become productive. Valereee (talk) 18:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your help - I feel my confusion on how this all works has led me to some issues! I'm not normally such a technophobe Branding by Becca (talk) 18:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to make a separate section for notability. The thing with notability is that it's extremely difficult to establish, particularly for people and especially for those in the worlds of business or activism - but especially for business people.

Part of this is because, more often than not, activists and business people tend to not gain the coverage needed to pass notability guidelines. Newspapers may mention them, but typically in passing and in relation to something else - like bringing them in to comment on a related topic or event. These types of mentions are considered to be trivial mentions and cannot establish notability. What's needed are more things like news articles that focus on the person in question. Articles that focus on an organization they're a part of can work, but if the coverage is more for the organization than the person then it's typically better to write about the organization and not the person.

I do see where there are mentions of awards, but be cautious of those. These don't always count towards notability on Wikipedia, as we need to be able to establish that the awards are notable and major enough to count towards notability. This is particularly important for business people, as the industry is crammed full of various types of awards. I'll be honest: Wikipedia is especially jaded when it comes to business related articles because it's extremely, extremely common for people to come on and try to promote a person or business, then use awards to justify inclusion - only to find that the awards themselves have gained little to no coverage outside of the award granting institution, which itself is not notable. It's difficult enough to where if someone gave me the choice of eating a ball of wasabi paste or writing a business article, I'd choose to eat the big ball of wasabi. It's just that difficult at times.

Now as far as Ms. Pickard goes, I'll take a look - but I wanted to give a general overview to explain how difficult this can be. If you're unblocked, I recommend only going through AfC for this. It really would be the safest way to make an article, as a COI article getting directly posted live is very prone to getting noticed and deleted. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 18:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

• Looking at the original draft, you've got some decent sources and not so decent sources as far as notability goes. One of the big issues here is that this is inevitably going to be reviewed with WP:NBUSINESS in mind. This is a tricky area since Pickard is a person and not a business, however some of the same rules will still apply. For example, with NBUSINESS most "top 100" or "top 10" lists aren't really considered to be anything other than a trivial source and I've seen people apply this to business people before at AfD. The rationale with this - and with most business awards in general - is that these tend to be kind of gratuitous. By this I mean that some organizations seem to do it more as a PR or glad-handing type of move, particularly when it doesn't get any notice outside of press releases, the parent organization, or the people or organizations listed. The same goes for lists by minor or non-notable organizations or companies.

To this end, avoid press releases like they're the plague. I'd avoid using the Yahoo source since it was written by a brand marketer and not a staff member. You could probably argue for the list being notable, but it would potentially be an uphill battle since Yahoo isn't as major as it once was. It's better to focus on the most major awards and honors, the ones given out by the more well-known and notable institutions.

The Pride Power List, Stonewall, and the Nestle list are probably usable. One is compiled by The Guardian and the other is part of the British LGBT Awards. Definitely try to find secondary sources for the British LGBT Award and Stonewall, though. The Pink News article is definitely usable. I'd avoid using primary sources and definitely avoid using Facebook. It's not that you can't use it, but it just doesn't look good.

Just at a glance Pickard looks to be probably notable or at least of borderline notability. This may come across harsh, but keep in mind that it's incredibly difficult to establish notability for people on here, particularly for business people. I've seen people argue for the deletion of people who were more or less household names to millions of people... and almost succeed. It doesn't mean that the person is bad or that they aren't doing great things, just that the guidelines are that strict on Wikipedia. They're unfortunately like that because well, there were a lot of people who abused the system on here and made all of these rules necessary. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:45, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for this information - as mentioned I believe my confusion on how everything works is causing my issues!

I do believe Bobbi is of notable interest in her field, and do have news articles etc., I can link to :)

Could you please confirm what AfC is? Branding by Becca (talk) 18:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Any advice on next steps would be greatly appreciated :) Branding by Becca (talk) 19:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You can create your new draft here WP:Article wizard/Create.

AfC is a process where other experienced editors will review your draft moving it to the main space.

Before creating the draft, you need to request for a new username using this format {{unblock-un|new username|your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your talk page. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 19:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh fantastic, thank you :) Branding by Becca (talk) 19:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded above with what I'd recommend. As far as the unblock goes, I'd recommend acknowledging that you were warned and that you are now aware that it needs to be changed - and that you'll do better. With COI stuff, saying that you didn't know isn't really going to cut it even if it's the truth. I can't emphasize enough how steep and sometimes unforgiving the learning curve can be with COI editing. ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 19:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely - have requested the username change, and will use the AfC going forward :) Branding by Becca (talk) 20:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry didn't see your comments above!

Great thanks for this - I can definitely find other sources Branding by Becca (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

Becca33 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Was not aware my username went against guidelines

Accept reason:

Unblocked by reader. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 20:40, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Deferring rename while conflict of interest discussion is under way -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:33, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem - sorry I thought this was needed :) Branding by Becca (talk) 19:35, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, @Deepfriedokra, I'd very clearly told her she should request the rename first, to get the unblock out of the way so we could discuss the COI. Am I in error? Valereee (talk) 20:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The blocking admin seems to be indicating above that they would like the COI/paid concerns addressed first. 331dot (talk) 21:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Renamed. Overrode the software's objection as not an exact match and inactive user. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:28, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, for goodness sake. @ReaderofthePack: Looks like I've made a mess of things. Unblock? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Great thank you!

Please can you advise what my next steps should be - I planned on creating a new page through the AfC declaring the COI. Is this an appropriate step, or do I need to do something else with the page I created previously? Becca33 (talk) 21:34, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I will defer to the blocking admin and to the others. Please be patient. You've been told different things by different people, and it is confusing. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 21:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s great, thank you Becca33 (talk) 21:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, so you've now addressed the username concern, and apologies for it being a bit confusing. We do need to discuss how, going forward, you plan to address the paid editing concerns. I do think you need to disclose as WP:PAID.

I'm about to go offline for the evening, but I'll be back on tomorrow for at least a short time (then off on vacation, unsure of availability while I'm travelling.) If you can be patient, we'll get through this. Valereee (talk) 22:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can this be address through AfC when creating a new page?

Have a great time! Becca33 (talk) 22:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It can be, but realize that if you submit multiple times without fixing the issues reviewers point out, eventually someone will simply reject; you'll be seen as wasting volunteer time here. It's hard to come back from that. But when/if @ReaderofthePack will consent to an unblock, I'd recommend, in this order:

1. Declaring your PAID status at User:Becca33
2. Reading WP:sigcov, WP:reliable sources, and WP:independent closely
3. Doing the best you can to write an article that follows the sources, without copyright violations
4. Consulting at WP:Teahouse about whether the article is ready to submit
5. And only then submitting through AfC.

Valereee (talk) 22:53, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s super helpful, thanks so much :) Becca33 (talk) 22:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ReaderofthePack? Valereee (talk) 22:59, 8 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: Reader is pretty sporadic of late. Are you in favor of unblocking? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Becca33: FWIW, information on content and common pitfalls to avoid can be located here and here. Hope that helps. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 00:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm willing to unblock under the condition she either agrees not to directly edit anything she has a conflict of interest with (which would include her employer, her clients, and employees of her employer/clients) or that she discloses those conflicts of interest. Valereee (talk) 09:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned above I will follow your guidance and plan to go through AfC where I can see the first option is creating a page about someone you know :) Becca33 (talk) 09:47, 10 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support unblock per Valeree. Blocking admin has not responded. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 14:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I took so long - been a hectic week! I agree with the unblock! ReaderofthePack(formerly Tokyogirl79) (｡◕‿◕｡) 17:36, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be back. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:24, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Valereee: You wanna unblock. I'm losing availability fast. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 19:42, 16 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Reader, I was travelling most of yesterday. Valereee (talk) 15:00, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks all :) Becca33 (talk) 07:58, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to check this is the correct action - do I place this on my user page:

{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=Username of the paid editor|U1-employer=Name of person/organization that is paying for the edits|U1-client= Name of client|U1-otherlinks=Insert diff to disclosure on your User page.}}

I also wanted to check this is the correct thing to be doing as I am not being paid to make a wikipedia page, its something I am choosing to do separate from my paid activities :) Becca33 (talk) 08:04, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Becca, that particular template is for use on the article talk page.

You can put on your user page at User:Becca33:

I am a PR professional, and while I haven't specifically been paid to edit Wikipedia, I have done other publicity work for my employers, so I'm disclosing my COI.

{{UserboxCOI|1=Bobbi Pickard|2=Trans in the City|3=Undivided Training & Consultancy}}

which will render as

This user has publicly declared that they have a conflict of interest regarding these Wikipedia articles: Bobbi Pickard Trans in the City Undivided Training & Consultancy

Again, it doesn't actually matter that you aren't being paid specifically to create or edit the articles. The fact you're being paid by the person/entity to do any publicity for the article subject means Wikipedia considers you a paid editor. And really none of us should be writing about our employers or coworkers or clients, even if our jobs don't include PR. Valereee (talk) 12:07, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Sorry it's been a busy few weeks. I have added this to my user page - hopefully correctly!!

I now plan to submit the article here: Wikipedia:Teahouse

And then here: Wikipedia:Articles for creation

Would these be the correct steps in your opinion? Becca33 (talk) 21:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]