: Let me be a bit more specific about why I reverted your edits. I had assumed that you were the author of the cited paper and since you have confirmed that it now puts you in the position of having a conflict of interest. To see how Wikipedia handles such conflicts see WP:COI. Also, Wikipedia is not a bulletin board − it is not a place to put announcements of new results (whether cited or not). Your paper is a primary source and Wikipedia does not use primary sources except in rare circumstances - see WP:SCHOLARSHIP. If someone else writes about your result (this would be a secondary source) and calls it a fundamental result concerning cyclotomic polynomials, then it could be included in the article and sourced to this secondary source. Many academics find this aspect of Wikipedia frustrating, I understand this but I find it essential in order to maintain Wikipedia's integrity. Those of us with academic backgrounds do not cite our own work nor put into Wikipedia material that is contained in our published papers, rather we use our expertise and familiarity with the literature to help improve this encyclopedic endeavor. I hope that you can see yourself furthering this effort.