User talk:EmiliaBOption

Hello EmiliaBOption. 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 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:EmiliaBOption. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=EmiliaBOption|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) 15:00, 6 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello MrOllie, Thank you for your message. I would like to clarify that while I am employed by IQ Option, I am not being compensated or instructed to edit Wikipedia on behalf of the company. My intention was solely to correct factual inaccuracies that I have noticed while reading the article and ensure that it reflects verifiable and nonjudgmental information in line with Wikipedia’s content and neutrality policies, not to promote or sanitize the company’s image.

If it is still required, I will add the {paid} disclosure template on my user page to ensure full transparency. May I then continue participating in the article’s talk page discussion to propose edits for review? EmiliaBOption (talk) 14:53, 8 October 2025 (UTC)

Hey there! Thanks for proposing your edits on the talk page and disclosing your COI. To clarify, yes, since you are employed by IQ Option, you are a paid editor. GoldRomean (talk) 17:48, 10 October 2025 (UTC)

Howdy! Thank you for your email. Without looking very closely into the actual content in dispute, I'm going to have to decline your request. As other editors have objected to your edit requests, the correct thing to do is continue discussion here onwiki; it would be inappropriate for me to make these controversial edits on your behalf, without consensus, and as a result of a private email. For transparency, I encourage you to try to keep all discussion onwiki (unless it truly is private). Thanks, GoldRomean (talk) 20:59, 14 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi! Thank you for your response and clarifications. For transparency and accuracy, may I suggest a few new edits through the Talk section of the IQ Option page for your review, and you can decide whether to include them? EmiliaBOption (talk) 12:40, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Yep, although I'm doing less COI edit requests lately so it might not be me that reviews it; if you use {{Edit COI}} somebody will come by eventually. GoldRomean (talk) 15:05, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I have published the edit request to the Talk page of IQ Option. I'd greatly appreciate your review if it's not too much trouble. EmiliaBOption (talk) 15:07, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

I'll take a look, but sorry, no guarantees—it's in the queue and will get reviewed eventually :). GoldRomean (talk) 15:10, 21 January 2026 (UTC)

Hello @GoldRomean! It has been more than a month since I created the additional request regarding this case. I would greatly appreciate it if you could review the edit at your earliest convenience. Thank you EmiliaBOption (talk) 15:14, 11 March 2026 (UTC)

Sorry, I'd really prefer a 2nd reviewer here. Unfortunately, the backlog of requests is really high right now (oldest is from November), and we are all just volunteers. I can confirm that your request is showing up in the queue, though. Best, GoldRomean (talk) 14:00, 12 March 2026 (UTC)