User talk:JordanWade33
July 2008
[edit]
Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, talk pages are meant to be a record of a discussion; deleting or editing legitimate comments, as you did at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/David dejonge, is considered bad practice, even if you meant well. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Your work on this article looks good and I will later review it and may amend my comments on the AfD page - but you must not do that for me. If you want to contribute to the AfD you may, of course, add comments of your own. Ros0709 (talk) 14:21, 25 July 2008 (UTC)
I said I would review the edits you made to this article and comment at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/David_dejonge accordingly, which I have done. I should add that I am not an administrator, I am just as "regular" user like yourself. I've been here a while so I may have the benefit of more experience and my comments below may be of use to you.
As yours is a newly registered account, created only minutes before you started editing the article, I considered it likely that you are the original editor taking on an alter-ego to avoid the accusation of conflict of interest. Despite what many think, it is perfectly acceptable for editors to switch identities and even run several concurrently - so long as they do not use both simultaneously in the same article etc in order to deceive. If you are also User:Dejongestudio it is perfectly legitimate for you to have switched id and to do so without disclosure. Your comment at the AfD here was probably not wise because this ID did not exist when the article was created. In any case, if you were originally editing from the studio on the machine the owner previously used as you say it is a no-brainer to suppose that you are connected with the studio and have a COI.
You do not have to disclose a COI when editing or creating articles. It is not forbidden to edit or create articles if you do have a COI - it is just a big flag that extra care must be taken to ensure neutrality. Aside from the (now-corrected) blip this evening I personally believe your edits have been dispassionate and perfectly acceptable. A COI is not a reason to delete the article - it simply means it may be scrutinised quite carefully, but it is now anyway since it nominated for deletion. My own view is that the article is safe (although mine is not the final say in the matter). I suggest you do not worry about a COI if there is one.