User talk:CottonsPoint

June 2025

Hello CottonsPoint. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Robert Thorp Lundahl, 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 employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. 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:CottonsPoint. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=CottonsPoint|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. Amigao (talk) 15:23, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not being paid by anyone related to the article, the edits or the individuals mentioned. CottonsPoint (talk) 18:25, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I expanded the article significantly in the last series of edits. Is this now lost? How do I retrieve it so I don't have to write it again? CottonsPoint (talk) 18:27, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to comment that many citations and links have been provided to newspapers, or press, actual individuals and given the previous comment about it reading like a resume, for verifiable factual intention.and reasons, the personal aspects, which tightly relate to the films and which have all been made public were included so its a better read. I'm happy to do so, but puleeease. This is important content, and important cinematic artistry,necessary today. CottonsPoint (talk) 18:47, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination of Robert Thorp Lundahl for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Robert Thorp Lundahl, to which you have significantly contributed, is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or if it should be deleted.

The discussion will take place at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Robert Thorp Lundahl until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

To customise your preferences for automated AfD notifications for articles to which you've significantly contributed (or to opt-out entirely), please visit the configuration page. Delivered by SDZeroBot (talk) 01:01, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]