User talk:GregoryWAndrews

Welcome!

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

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Gregory Andrews, 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
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
The Teahouse, our help forum for new editors

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, visit the Teahouse, 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! –Skywatcher68 (talk) 14:52, 16 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Skywatcher. The information is false and defamatory and biased. The NT Coroner said, on the basis of the same evidence I gave that my work was outstanding. And a through independent inquiry named The Little Children Are Sacred Report also found that my statements on Lateline were accurate.

Mischievous people put misinformation about me on the internet and stalk and harass me. This is part of that campaign. GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:39, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This is the statement I made at the time. https://www.lyrebirddreaming.com/_files/ugd/d3c6c2_2aeb3a61abce4c32b00318fedb151b56.pdf

The mischievous man Chris Graham also accused me of being a security services plant for my hunger strike. https://www.lyrebirddreaming.com/_files/ugd/d3c6c2_9844ed00ca9942039f9fa9e8c8e4d1b3.pdf

Here is the coroners report which said I’m outstanding

https://justice.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/208366/A22-04,-A49-04,-A54-04-Petrol-Sniffing.pdf GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Peak body representing the Aboriginal women in the NT said all Lateline witnesses were credible (including me)

https://www.smh.com.au/national/claims-of-child-sex-network-in-nt-20060622-gdnsz7.html GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ABC’s independent complaints tribunal found I was a “reliable and credit worthy witness"

https://www.lyrebirddreaming.com/_files/ugd/d3c6c2_ef72ecf0958b4c84be4496de82673f88.pdf GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:46, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Little Children are Sacred Report in 2007 found there was "a significant problem" in Northern Territory communities in relation to sexual abuse of children. GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:47, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Peak body representing the Aboriginal women in the NT said all Lateline witnesses were credible (including me)

https://www.smh.com.au/national/claims-of-child-sex-network-in-nt-20060622-gdnsz7.html GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:44, 16 September 2024 (UTC) GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The Little Children are Sacred Report in 2007 found there was "a significant problem" in Northern Territory communities in relation to sexual abuse of children. GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The ABC’s independent complaints tribunal found I was a “reliable and credit worthy witness"

https://www.lyrebirddreaming.com/_files/ugd/d3c6c2_ef72ecf0958b4c84be4496de82673f88.pdf GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:48, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Misinformation and defamatory material circulates on the internet about me as a result of my stand. Much of it is recycled and weaponised from false statements made about me under parliamentary privilege by former Northern Territory and Federal politicians. I wrote to the NT's then Chief Minister and Treasurer Claire Martin and Syd Stirling in 2006 outlining the facts and asking them to correct the record. I wrote similarly to Federal politicians Warren Snowdon and Trish Crossin. None of them replied or corrected the record. Parliamentary privilege exempted them from defamation laws and accountability.

Seventeen years later, I still get abused, gaslighted and cancelled. There are plenty of conspiracy theories about me. I even get blamed for the Northern Territory Intervention which is a bit rich, especially when it comes from so-called progressives who blame me as an Aboriginal man for the actions of a white Prime Minister at the time. During my #ClimateHungerStrike in 2023, a journalist who has always had an unhealthy interest in me and published much of the information, wrote suggesting I was trying to infiltrate the environment movement on behalf of security services.

I issued a statement about my appearance on Lateline in 2006 and I stand by that. I'm proud for standing up for human rights. GregoryWAndrews (talk) 03:53, 16 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Skywalker68.

The page 'Gregory Andrews' has false and defamatory material about me on it. This is degrading of Wikipedia’s integrity and inconsistent with Wikipedia’s living biographies policy. I was never ‘found’ to have lied. I was accused on lying by politicians and journalist Chris Graham. An Independent Complaints Review Panel of the ABC chaired by eminent QC Michael L Foster found on 24 January 2008 that I was a credible witness. The Panel found no evidence of lying by me or any of the witnesses on the Lateline program. Furthermore, on the basis of the same evidence, the NT Coroner found me to be an "outstanding" witness. The links to these 'findings' are below.

https://web.archive.org/web/20080806111511/http://www.abc.net.au/corp/pubs/documents/feb_23_08_mutitjulu_final_report.pdf

https://justice.nt.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/208366/A22-04,-A49-04,-A54-04-Petrol-Sniffing.pdf GregoryWAndrews (talk) 05:31, 26 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, GregoryWAndrews. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Gregory Andrews, 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 article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
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 Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
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, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. R0paire-wiki (talk) 23:07, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

September 2024

Hello, I'm R0paire-wiki. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit to Gregory Andrews seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. R0paire-wiki (talk) 23:11, 15 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Gregory Andrews, you may be blocked from editing. R0paire-wiki (talk) 20:43, 30 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. R0paire-wiki (talk) 08:40, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

October 2024

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for making legal threats or taking legal action.

You are not allowed to edit Wikipedia while the threats stand or the legal action is unresolved.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 13:28, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked for sockpuppetry

Wikipedia's technical logs indicate that this user account has been or may be used abusively per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/GregoryWAndrews. It has been blocked indefinitely from editing to prevent abuse.

Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.
If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you should review the guide to appealing blocks, and then appeal your block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}}. Note that anything you post in your unblock request will be public, so you may alternatively use the Unblock Ticket Request System to submit an appeal if it contains information that must be private.

Administrators: Checkusers have access to confidential system logs not accessible by the public or by administrators due to the Wikimedia Foundation's privacy policy. You must not loosen or remove this block, or issue an IP block exemption, without consulting with a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee. Administrators who undo checkuser blocks without permission from a checkuser or the Arbitration Committee may be summarily desysopped.

Izno (talk) 23:50, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]