User talk:GWaldron88

Welcome!

Hello, GWaldron88, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Mark D. Siljander, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

Best practices for editors with close associations
Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! gobonobo ⁺ ^c 17:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Neutrality^talk 18:25, 24 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

December 2020

You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war according to the reverts you have made on Mark D. Siljander; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note:

Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. gobonobo ⁺ ^c 04:30, 25 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GWaldron88, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi GWaldron88! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

COI editing

Once you have made your COI disclosure, it does not mean you are free to edit the COI-affected article as you like. Very, very minor factual edits are all that is allowed. The rest gets requested at the article talk page, so that a neutral editor can work on it. Thanks. Possibly (talk) 02:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, GWaldron88. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Please stop directly editing pages that you have a conflict of interest with. Use the talk page to make requests Possibly (talk) 20:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)[reply]

March 2021

Hello, I'm CommanderWaterford. I noticed that in this edit to Mark D. Siljander, you removed content without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, the removed content has been restored. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. CommanderWaterford (talk) 13:38, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Neutrality^talk 17:18, 16 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Do not delete other editors’ talk page posts

If you persist, you’re very likely to get blocked or banned. Please stop. Neutrality^talk 19:33, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Neutrality I suggest we submit a third party dispute resolution or other mediation. Your edits are: (1) disruptive to the integrity of COI request process which has been pending for 4.5 months, your independent, all or nothing actions have reset the COI request process; Given the nature of the content in dispute and that it may be libelous to a BLP, I suggest we request a {{3O}} or {{DRN}} COI requested edits are: (1) not promotional; (2) is intended to replace incomplete or inaccurate material already in the article; (3) uses NPOV language; and (4) uses 6 different U.S. government primary sources as citations primary sourcing.

--GWaldron88 (talk) 22:21, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because it appears that you are not here to build an encyclopedia.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

I am blocking you because it is increasingly clear that you are not here to build an encyclopedia, but rather to promote Mr. Siljander and his nonprofit. Your edits show that you are unwilling to conform your activity to our conflict-of-interest policy or other policies and guidelines, as shown by your conduct in:

Directly editing the biographical article of the individual who leads the nonprofit that (according to your user page) you work for;
Promotional editing;
Edit-warring to insert promotional edits;
Removing other users' talk-page comments, despite a direct warning not to do that; and
Borderline legal threats (claim of "defamation," "libelous," etc.).

You may appeal in accordance with the template above. Neutrality^talk 22:22, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

GWaldron88 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

As a new user, I have made every reasonable effort to comply with WP policy by disclosing the COI, requesting a COI requested edit 4.5 months ago and by submitting NPOV primary source suggestions for community review on [1]. My COI request and other attempts to work withNeutrality have been rejected outright instead of with good faith {{WP:NEGOTIATE}} I am requesting {{WP:DRN}} {{WP:3O}} GWaldron88 (talk) 22:37, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only; user had two open unblock requests. The other one was reviewed, so no need to review this one. User is free to make another unblock request. Yamla (talk) 13:56, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Cite error: There are <ref> tags on this page without content in them (see the help page).

Unblock Request

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

GWaldron88 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

As a new user, I have made every reasonable effort to comply with WP policy by disclosing the COI, requesting a COI requested edit 4.5 months ago and by submitting NPOV primary source suggestions for community review on Mark D. Siljander Dispute or edit war withNeutrality My suggestions have been rejected outright instead of with good faith to negotiate the wording and outcomes of well cited primary sources. I am requesting an unblock and a dispute resolution. (1) I am not engaged in promotional editing, (2) I am unfamiliar with how to respond to current discussions on talk pages and have not intent of violating WP policy, (3) I am not threatening legal action, I have simply stated that from my review, WP policy is to remove potentially libelous content from a BLP. Given the nature of the disputed language (allegations of association with terrorism) and the complexity of the subject, I am requesting community assistance and other good faith negotiation. GWaldron88 (talk) 22:46, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You edited the article directly, which in general you should not do. You also removed the comments of others from article talk pages, which is not generally permitted either- and you did so to reopen your addressed edit request, because you disagreed with the result, which was made with reasons based in Wikipedia guidelines. You haven't described how the current wording is inaccurate and seem to want to whitewash it to benefit the former congressman. If there are topics other than Congressman Siljander you want to edit about, we can talk about that, but I see no reason to remove the block, and as such I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 07:39, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

I received your email; I think it would not be appropriate to be further involved with this matter at this time. You are free to make another unblock request to attempt to convince another administrator to unblock you. Any decision will be up to them. 331dot (talk) 21:13, 19 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]