User talk:LexaDlawok

January 2021

Hello, I'm LightningComplexFire. I noticed that you recently removed content from Tom Kirkwood without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use your sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 16:44, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content, as you did at Tom Kirkwood, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Ashley yoursmile! 17:26, 15 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Tom Kirkwood, you may be blocked from editing. DarkMatterMan4500 (talk) (contribs) 12:28, 16 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Tom Kirkwood. Lettler^{hello • contribs} 04:05, 31 January 2021 (UTC)[reply]

LexaDlawok, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi LexaDlawok! 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 Gestrid (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:02, 16 January 2021 (UTC)

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. The thread is Tom Kirkwood. The discussion is about the topic Tom Kirkwood. Thank you. —NJD-DE (talk) 18:13, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

February 2021

As previously advised, your edits give the impression you have a financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. You were asked to cease editing until you responded by either stating that you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits, or by complying with the mandatory requirements under the Wikimedia Terms of Use that you disclose your employer, client and affiliation. Again, you can post such a disclosure on your user page at User:LexaDlawok, and the template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=LexaDlawok|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. Please respond before making any other edits to Wikipedia. Possibly (talk) 18:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You appear to be editing on behalf of Tom Kirkwood. Please explain here or at the above-linked conflict of interest discussion. Possibly (talk) 18:49, 4 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, my modifications of Tom Kirkwood have been reverted several times whithout any good reason. I added additional information to the stub page including over 20 references. Yes, many of those point to publications of Tom Kirkwood, but that seems reasonable to me since he is a scientist and the article is about his life and scientific work. I have ABSOLUTELY no financial interest in modifying this page. Instead Tom Kirkwood is a colleague of mine and he asked me if I could update this page about him. I'm doing this as a favor without receiving any money or other benefits. If your could be more clear about what you don't like about my contribution or the used references please let me know and I try to improve it. LexaDlawok (talk) 14:14, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@LexaDlawok:thanks for your reply. Your latest edit was reversed with the edit summary (seethe page history) "conflict of interest concerns, largely unsourced or not sourced with reliable sources". Regarding COI, see WP:COI and please use the article's talk page to request edits in future. Changes to a page should usually be acocmpanied by reliable sources: what we look for is good, in-depth reporting that confirms what is said on the Wikipedia page. Thanks. Possibly (talk) 16:04, 5 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I see, as colleague I have a COI! Thanks for adding a COI statement to the articles talk page. I also added now a requests for edit to the talk page. So that's it and now I wait!? LexaDlawok (talk) 13:05, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@LexaDlawok: Thanks for using the request edit template. Yes, you will have to wait until another editor reviews your request. This may take some time, as there is a large backlog of requests. I also suggest that you add a declaration to your userpage by following the instructions at WP:DISCLOSE. If you have any questions, please ask them at the help desk. Z1720 (talk) 19:06, 6 February 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I fail to see any indication of a conflict of interest (?) I have just looked up Tom Kirkwood in Wikipedia because of a reference to his work in an excellent book about the role of oxygen in evolutionary history, by the impeccable biochemist Nick Lane. Interestingly one of the topics centrally addressed by Kirkwood is the biological immune response, to which Wikipedia surveillance and editing is clearly a analogue ! How might I help release the Tom Kirkwood biography from current travails ?? I wonder 38.99.190.247 (talk) 17:24, 17 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]