For specific cases where you would like to seek input from the community or may be able to help, see the conflict of interest noticeboard.  উইকিপিডিয়া স্বার্থের সংঘাত (COI) উইকিপিডিয়ার মূল উদ্দেশ্যের একটি অসঙ্গতি, যেটি একটি নিরপেক্ষ ও নির্ভরযোগ্য উৎসযুক্ত বিশ্বকোষ তৈরি করতে এবং একজন স্বতন্ত্র সম্পাদকের ব্যক্তিগত উদ্দেশ্য পার্থক্য সূচীত হয়।  COI editing involves contributing to Wikipedia in order to promote your own interests or those of other individuals, companies, or groups. Where advancing outside interests is more important to an editor than advancing the aims of Wikipedia, that editor stands in a conflict of interest.  COI editing is strongly discouraged.  When editing causes disruption to the encyclopedia through violation of policies such as neutral point of view, what Wikipedia is not, and copyright compliance, accounts may be blocked. COI editing also risks causing public embarrassment outside of Wikipedia for the individuals and groups being promoted.Editing in the interests of public relations is particularly frowned upon. This includes, but is not limited to, edits made by public relations departments of corporations or governmental entities; or of other public or private for-profit or not-for-profit organizations; or by professional editors paid to edit a Wikipedia article with the sole intent of improving that organization's image. Wikipedia is a very public forum, and news of what occurs here is frequently reported in the media. "Anything you say here and anything you do here can have real world consequences." See: Wikipedia is in the real world  Editors with COIs are strongly encouraged to declare their interests, both on their user pages and on the talk page of any article they edit, particularly if those edits may be contested. Most Wikipedians will appreciate your honesty. Editors who disguise their COIs are often exposed, creating a perception that they, and perhaps their employer, are trying to distort Wikipedia.  When investigating possible cases of COI editing, Wikipedians must be careful not to reveal the identity of other editors. Wikipedia's policy against harassment takes precedence over this guideline on conflict of interest. An editor's conflict of interest is often revealed when that editor discloses a relationship to the subject of the article to which the editor is contributing.  Where an editor does not disclose an existing affiliation or other conflict of interest, carefully following Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy may help counteract biased editing.  Even though most COI editing is discouraged, in limited cases some edits from COI editors may still be welcome. See the non-controversial edits section below.   স্বার্থের সংঘাত কী?   উইকিপিডিয়া একটি বিশ্বকোষ, নিজেকে বিজ্ঞাপন প্রচার বা প্রচারের জন্য ফোরাম বা ভ্যানিটি প্রেস নয়। সেই হিসাবে এটির মধ্যে কেবলমাত্র এমন উপাদান থাকতে হবে যা এর বিষয়বস্তু নীতিমালা মেনে চলে এবং উইকিপিডিয়ানদের অবশ্যই বিশ্বকোষের স্বার্থকে প্রথমে রাখতে হবে। বাইরের স্বার্থকে অগ্রাধিকার দেবে এমন যে কোনও সম্পাদক স্বার্থের সংঘাতের শিকার হতে পারেন।  আগ্রহের দ্বন্দ্ব রয়েছে কিনা তা নির্ধারণের জন্য দৃঢ় মানদণ্ড নেই তবে সতর্কতার লক্ষণ রয়েছে। কোনও নিবন্ধের লেখক, এর লেখকের পরিবারের সদস্য, নিয়োগকর্তা, সহযোগী বা তাদের ব্যবসায়িক বা ব্যক্তিগত স্বার্থের আগ্রহ বা দৃশ্যমানতা প্রচার করার মতো উপাদান যুক্ত করা লেখককে স্বার্থের সংঘাতের মধ্যে ফেলে। যখন সম্পাদকরা তাদের নিজস্ব আগ্রহের প্রচার করতে লেখেন, তাদের অবদানগুলি প্রায়শই সাধারণ পাঠক একটি তথ্যসূত্র হিসাবে পরামর্শ নিতে চাইলে এমন কোনও সংযোগের বৈশিষ্ট্যগত অভাব দেখা দেয়। আপনি যদি এমন কোনও অঞ্চলে নিবন্ধ লিখেন যেখানে আপনি ব্যক্তিগতভাবে জড়িত থাকেন তবে একটি নিরপেক্ষ দৃষ্টিভঙ্গিতে লেখতে ভুলবেন না এবং নির্ভরযোগ্য, তৃতীয় পক্ষ প্রকাশিত উৎস  উদ্ধৃত করুন এবং অজান্তেই পক্ষপাত সম্পর্কে সতর্ক থাকুন।   নিরপেক্ষ দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি উইকিপিডিয়াদের অন্যতম পাঁচ স্তম্ভ।  যদি অন্য সম্পাদকরা পরামর্শ দেন যে আপনার সম্পাদনাটি উইকিপিডিয়া মানকে লঙ্ঘন করে, সেই পরামর্শটিকে গুরুত্ব সহকারে গ্রহণ করুন এবং আপনার সম্পাদনাগুলি পুনরায় মূল্যায়ন করা এবং সম্প্রদায়ের সাথে আপনার উদ্দেশ্যগুলি নিয়ে আলোচনা করা উচিত।  বিশেষত, আপনি প্রচ্ছন্ন সম্পাদনা করছেন কিনা তা বিবেচনা করুন। Examples  নিজেকে উদ্ধৃত করা  Editing in an area in which you have professional or academic expertise is not, in itself, a conflict of interest. Using material you yourself have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is notable and conforms to the content policies. Excessive self-citation is strongly discouraged. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion.  Financial If you fit either of these descriptions:   you are receiving monetary or other benefits or considerations to edit Wikipedia as a representative of an organization (whether directly as an employee or contractor of that organization, or indirectly as an employee or contractor of a firm hired by that organization for public relations purposes); or  you expect to derive monetary or other benefits or considerations from editing Wikipedia; for example, by being an owner, officer, or other stakeholder of a company or other organization about which you are writing;  then you are very strongly encouraged to avoid editing Wikipedia in areas where there is a conflict of interest that may make your edits non-neutral (biased). Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy states that all articles must represent views fairly and without bias, and conflicts of interest may significantly and negatively affect Wikipedia's ability to fulfill this requirement. If your financially motivated edits would be non-neutral, do not post them.  Generally speaking, the Reward Board is an exception to the above cautions.  There, you may derive monetary gain from editing Wikipedia, as these are usually rewards for featured or good article status which should not introduce bias. However, be wary of editors asking you to make specific edits that challenge your sense of neutral perspective, or to clean up a "hatchet job", as you may unwarily become their meatpuppet.  Legal antagonists If you are involved in a court case, or close to one of the litigants, you would find it very hard to demonstrate that what you wrote about a party or a law firm associated with the case, or a related area of law, was entirely objective. Even a minor slip-up in neutrality in a court-case article on Wikipedia for an active case-in-progress could potentially be noticed by the courts or their parties, and this could potentially cause real-world harm, not just harm to Wikipedia. Because of this, we strongly discourage editing when this type of conflict exists.  Autobiography  It is not recommended that you write an article about yourself. If you are notable, someone else will notice you and write the article. In some cases, Wikipedia users write articles about themselves when the more appropriate action would be to create a user page. In these cases, the article is normally moved into the user namespace rather than deleted. If you believe you may be notable enough, make your case on the appropriate talk pages, and seek consensus first, both with the notability and any proposed autobiography.  Self-promotion Conflict of interest often presents itself in the form of self-promotion, including advertising links, personal website links, personal or semi-personal photos, or other material that appears to promote the private or commercial interests of the editor, or their associates.  Examples of these types of material include:  Links that appear to promote products by pointing to obscure or not particularly relevant commercial sites (commercial links).  Links that appear to promote otherwise obscure individuals by pointing to their personal pages.  Biographical material that does not significantly add to the clarity or quality of the article.  Promotional article production on behalf of clients Editors should not create articles which serve solely to promote their subject. All Wikipedia articles should contain useful information written as if from a neutral point of view. The writing of "puff pieces" and advertisements on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited. If you contribute to Wikipedia on behalf of clients, you owe it to both them and the encyclopedia to make very sure you understand the standards for content here, and do not insert promotional material.  Campaigning Activities regarded by insiders as simply "getting the word out" may appear promotional or propagandistic to the outside world. If you edit articles while involved with organizations that engage in advocacy in that area, you may have a conflict of interest.  Close relationships Friedrich Engels would have had difficulty editing the Karl Marx article, because he was a close friend, follower, and collaborator of Marx.Isaiah Berlin:   In his own lifetime Engels desired no better fate than to live in the light of Marx's teaching, perceiving in him a spring of original genius which gave life and scope to his own peculiar gifts; with him he identified himself and his work, to be rewarded by sharing in his master's immortality.  From Berlin's Karl Marx, 4th edition, p. 75. This description covers several aspects of what it might be to stand too close to a subject. Any situation in which strong relationships can develop may trigger a conflict of interest. Conflict of interest can be personal, religious, political, academic, financial, and legal. It is not determined by area, but is created by relationships that involve a high level of personal commitment to, involvement with, or dependence upon a person, subject, idea, tradition, or organization.  Closeness to a subject does not mean you're incapable of being neutral, but it may incline you towards some bias. Be guided by the advice of other editors. If editors on a talk page suggest in good faith that you may have a conflict of interest, try to identify and minimize your biases, and consider withdrawing from editing the article. As a rule of thumb, the more involvement you have with a topic in real life, the more careful you should be with our core content policies—Wikipedia:Neutral point of view, Wikipedia:No original research, and Wikipedia:Verifiability—when editing in that area.   The definition of "too close" in this context is governed by common sense. An article about a little-known band should preferably not be written by the band's manager or a band member's spouse. However, an expert on trees is welcome to contribute to articles on that subject, even if that editor is deeply committed to the subject.  কীভাবে সিওআই সম্পাদনাগুলি এড়ানো যায় উইকিপিডিয়া হ'ল "এনসাইক্লোপিডিয়া যা যে কেউ সম্পাদনা করতে পারে", তবে আপনার স্বার্থের সংঘাত থাকলে এড়িয়ে যান , বা  অত্যন্ত সাবধানতা অবলম্বন করুন, যখন: আপনার সংস্থা বা এর প্রতিযোগীদের, পাশাপাশি প্রকল্প এবং পণ্যগুলির সাথে সম্পর্কিত যা তাদের সাথে সম্পর্কিত নিবন্ধগুলি সম্পাদনা করছে; আপনার সংস্থা বা এর প্রতিযোগীদের সম্পর্কিত নিবন্ধগুলি সম্পর্কে মুছে ফেলার আলোচনাতে অংশ নেওয়া; এবং  উইকিপিডিয়া নিবন্ধের সাথে, আপনার নিজস্ব ব্যবহারকারী পৃষ্ঠা বা অন্যান্য সংস্থার নিবন্ধে আপনার সংস্থার ওয়েবসাইট (দেখুন উইকিপিডিয়া:স্প্যাম)  সংযুক্ত করা; এবং আপনার অবশ্যই সর্বদা:  প্রাসঙ্গিক নীতিমালা ও নির্দেশাবলী ভঙ্গ এড়িয়ে চলুন বিশেষত নিরপেক্ষ দৃষ্টিভঙ্গি, যাচাইযোগ্যতা, এবং আত্মজীবনী   ActionThose who feel the need to make controversial edits, in spite of a real or perceived conflict of interest, are strongly encouraged to submit proposed edits for review on the article's talk page along with a {{Request edit}} tag to attract users to review the edit, or to file a request for comment.   User subspace to publish short autobiographies Contributing signed-in users may use their user subspace to publish short autobiographies within the bounds of good taste and compatible with the purpose of working on the encyclopedia.  If you wish to write about yourself without working on the encyclopedia, consider starting a website or a blog instead. Wikipedia is not a free webhost.  How to handle conflicts of interest Conflict of interest often raises questions as to whether material should be included in the encyclopedia or not. It also can be a cause, or contributing factor, in disputes over whether editors have an agenda that undermines the mission of Wikipedia.  Suspected conflict of interest incidents may be reported on the conflict of interest noticeboard (WP:COIN), and users may be warned with the  user warning template.  Conflict of interest is not a reason to delete an article, though other problems with the article arising from a conflict of interest may be valid criteria for deletion.  Dealing with suspected conflicted editors The first approach should be direct discussion of the issue with the editor, referring to this guideline. If persuasion fails, consider whether you are involved in a content dispute. If so, an early recourse to dispute resolution may help. Another option is to initiate discussion at WP:COIN, where experienced editors may be able to help you resolve the matter without recourse to publishing assertions and accusations on Wikipedia. Using COI allegations to harass an editor or to gain the upper hand in a content dispute is prohibited, and can result in a block or ban.   Wikipedia places importance on both the neutrality of articles and the ability of editors to edit pseudonymously. Do not out an editor's real life identity in order to prove a conflict of interest. Wikipedia's policy against harassment prohibits this.  COI situations are usually revealed when the editor themself discloses a relationship to the subject that they are editing.  In case the editor does not identify themself or their affiliation, reference to the neutral point of view policy may help counteract biased editing.  Primacy of basic content policies All text created in the Wikipedia main namespace is subject to rules covering criteria for articles (what Wikipedia is not); encyclopedic quality (verifiability and original research); editorial approach (neutral point of view); as well as the Wikipedia copyright policy. All editors are expected to stick closely to these policies when creating and evaluating material, and to respect the good faith actions of others who edit content to ensure it complies with these policies.  Who has written the material should be irrelevant so long as these policies are closely adhered to. The imputation of conflict of interest is not by itself a good reason to remove sound material from articles.  However, an apparent conflict of interest is a good reason for close review by the community to identify any subtle bias.  Where an article is about something obviously important, but was written with too much COI to easily edit, it is often possible to reduce the article to basic identifying information, and then neutral editors can help improve the article.   Importance of civility During debates on articles' talk pages and at articles for deletion, disparaging comments may fly about the subject of the article/author and the author's motives. These may border on forbidden personal attacks, and may discourage the article's creator from making future valuable contributions.Avoid using the word "vanity" or similar judgmental terms—this is accusatory and discouraging. It is not helpful, nor reason to delete an article. Assuming good faith, start from the idea that the contributor was genuinely trying to help increase Wikipedia's coverage.  Conflict of interest in point of view disputes Another case can arise in disputes relating to non-neutral points of view, where underlying conflicts of interest may aggravate editorial disagreements. In this scenario, it may be easy to make claims about conflict of interest.  Do not use conflict of interest as an excuse to gain the upper hand in a content dispute.  When conflicts exist, invite the conflicted editor to contribute to the article talk page, and give their views fair consideration.  How not to handle COI  There is a little drama that is enacted more often than it should be.   Act One: Someone writes a hatchet job about a company with a less-than-stellar reputation.   Act Two: The company arrives, and is (justifiably) horrified and angered by the hatchet job.  It responds without experience, clumsily, by trying to whitewash the article.   Act Three: Self-righteous Wikipedian responds in anger against the attempt to "censor" or "whitewash" by yelling at the company, and forcing the article back to hatchet job status.   Act Four: Company comes crying to the volunteer response team and the office.   Act Five: In the happy version of the ending, OTRS/the office comes in and reminds everyone to act with love and neutrality to write a good article which is acceptable to both reasonable critics and reasonable supporters of the company ... reliance on solid sources, neutral language, etc., carries the day.  In reality, Act Five often ends up cycling back through Acts One through Four.  This is a Bad Thing.  Remember: an editor with a self-evident interest in the matter turning up on the talk page is an indication that they are playing it straight. Even if the changes they advocate are hopelessly biased, treat them with respect and courtesy, refer to policy and sources, and be fair.  Editors who may have a conflict of interest This section of the guideline is aimed at editors who may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits in mainspace where there is a clear conflict of interest, or where such a conflict can be reasonably assumed, are strongly discouraged. Significantly biased edits in mainspace are forbidden.  Non-controversial edits  Editors who may have a conflict of interest may nevertheless add material that accords with the Photographs and media files or Subject and culture sector professionals sections below, and are allowed to make certain kinds of non-controversial edits, such as:    Removing spam and reverting vandalism.   Deleting content that violates Wikipedia's biography of living persons policy.   Fixing spelling and grammar errors.   Reverting or removing their own COI edits.  Cleaning up your own mess is allowed and encouraged.   Making edits that have been agreed to on the talk page.   Adding citations, especially when another editor has requested them.  If another editor objects for any reason, then it's a controversial edit. Such edits should be discussed on the article's talk page.     Photographs and media files Wikimedia Commons encourages parties with potential conflicts of interest to upload digital media files, such as photographs, illustrations, audio files, and video clips, so long as the media is of good quality, is in a format we use, and the copyright holder is willing do so under one of the free licenses we accept.    While Commons prefers full resolution media, reduced resolution images are acceptable when the copyright owner is unwilling to freely license a full quality image. See Commons:Welcome for detailed requirements.  Once media files are uploaded to Commons, they can then be incorporated into Wikipedia articles where appropriate. The best approach is to  mention the availability of the image or media files on the article's talk page.  But it is usually acceptable to edit the article directly to add one or two images that illustrate the existing article content, e.g.. adding a publicity mug shot to the biography of a performing artist (but only if it's available under a free license).  Subject and culture sector professionals  Museum curators, librarians, archivists, art historians, heritage interpreters, conservators, documentation managers, subject specialists, and managers of a special collection (or similar profession) are encouraged to use their knowledge to help improve Wikipedia, or to share their information with Wikipedia in the form of links to their resources.  Wikipedia prefers the addition of content using reliable sources. If a link cannot be used to expand an article, the link may be placed under further reading or external links providing the link complies with the external links guideline and is not covered by any of the points under links to avoid. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is not a mirror or a repository of links, images, or media files.  Don't create a shared organizational account and don't include the name of the organization in the account name.  It is recommended but not required for such editors to declare their affiliation on their user page.  When in doubt, first suggest the addition of the link on the talk page of the article, or discuss the addition with an appropriate WikiProject.  For more information, see Advice for the cultural sector.  Declaring an interest Some editors declare an interest in a particular topic area. They do this in various ways. Many Wikipedians show their allegiances and affiliations on their user pages. You may choose to reveal something about yourself in a talk page discussion.    Reasons to declare an interest  You will benefit from the assumption of good faith.  Most editors will appreciate your honesty and try to help you.  You lay the basis for requesting help from others to post material for you, or to review material you wish to post yourself.  Professional public relations firms are required to abide by the PRSA code of ethics.  Disadvantages of COI editing on the sly  If your edits violate neutral point of view, they can be reverted.  Although other editors are not allowed to reveal your identity, they may come to understand who you are, and may realize that you are gaming the system.  People outside Wikipedia, such as reporters, may uncover your COI editing, and may generate negative publicity for you or your company.  Wikipedia cannot prevent outsiders from discovering and revealing your identity.  Example of a disclosure This disclosure note shows how a user who wishes to edit on behalf of a topic to which they are closely connected can request help from other editors.  Defending interests In a few cases, outside interests coincide with Wikipedia’s interests. An important example is that unsupported defamatory material appearing in articles may be removed at once. Anyone may do this, and should do this, and this guideline applies widely to any unsourced or poorly sourced, potentially libelous postings. In this case it is unproblematic to defend the interest of the person or institution involved. An entire article that presents as an attack piece or hostile journalism can be nominated for speedy deletion and will be removed promptly from the site. Those who post here in this fashion will also be subject to administrative sanction. Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons gives details on how biographical articles on living persons should be written.  On the other hand, the removal of reliably sourced critical material is not permitted. Accounts of public controversies, if backed by reliable sources, form an integral part of Wikipedia's coverage. Slanting the balance of articles as a form of defence of some figure, group, institution, or product is bad for the encyclopedia. This is also the case if you find an article overwhelmed with correctly referenced, but exclusively negative, information. This may present a case of undue weight, for example, when 90% of an article about a particular company discusses a lawsuit one client once brought against it. In such a case, such material should be condensed by a neutral editor, and the other sections expanded. One of the best ways to go about this is to request this on the article's talk page.   The intermediate territory will naturally contain some grey areas. Although this is not recommended in the NPOV policy, criticism may tend to collect in a separate section. There you may find properly referenced reports of well-publicised debates next to vague assertions that "Some people say X, while others think Y." Treat everything on its merits. Ask for reliable sources. Before removing a whole criticism section or article and distributing its parts over other sections of the article, which may be the best way ahead, consult other editors on the talk page. Use crisp, informative edit summaries to detail what you have done, an excellent way to establish your reputation as a diligent editor. Raise any less-obvious reasoning as a note on the talk page, with any additional links that support your edits.  Suggesting changes to articles, or requesting a new article  An editor with a conflict of interest who wishes to suggest substantive changes to an article should use that article's talk page.   When making a request, please consider disclosing your conflict of interest to avoid misunderstanding.  To request a new article, you can present your idea on the talk page of a relevant article or WikiProject.  Consequences of ignoring this guideline  {| style="border:black solid 1px" width="90%" | style="background-color:#c8ffc8" | Wikipedia's Law of Unintended ConsequencesIf you write in Wikipedia about yourself, your group, your company, or your pet idea, once the article is created, you have no rights to control its content, and no right to delete it outside our normal channels.  Content is irrevocably added with every edit, and once added will not be deleted just because the author doesn't like it any more. Any editor has the right to add or remove material to the article within the terms of our content policies. If there is anything publicly available on a topic that you would not want included in an article, it will probably find its way there eventually. More than one user has created an article only to find themselves presented in a poor light long-term by other editors. If you breach our editing policies or "edit war" in an attempt to obtain a version of your liking you are likely to have your editing access removed.  In addition, if your article is found not to be worthy of inclusion in the first place, it will be deleted, as per our deletion policies. Therefore, don't create promotional or other articles lightly, especially on subjects you care about.   |}  Blocks  Accounts that appear, based on their edit history, to exist for the sole or primary purpose''' of promoting a person, company, product, service, or organization in apparent violation of this guideline should be warned and made aware of this guideline. If the same pattern of editing continues after the warning, the account may be blocked.  See also Wikipedia:Contact us/Article problem/Factual error (from enterprise) Template:Uw-coi for warning editors who have an apparent conflict of interest. Template:COI for tagging articles affected by conflict of interest that may be candidates for deletion. :Category:Requested edits lists proposed edits for review where the proposer has a self-reported conflict of interest. Wikipedia:Spam Wikipedia:Reward board Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations User:COIBot Users creating autobiographies, an edit filter. Database report of biographies of living people with a close title to their page creator.  Notes  বিষয়শ্রেণী:উইকিপিডিয়া আচরণগত নির্দেশাবলী