User talk:MDennett

Martin dennett

This was a non-notable biography as per the criteria set out in WP:BIO. You can use your userpage to tell other editors about yourself. (aeropagitica) 11:38, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Long Way Round

I can't find reference to "International SOS" in either the book or DVD of LWR. Please include a source or point out where this appears in LWR before reposting this information. Cheers, Deizio talk 11:49, 26 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

International SOS was not mentioned as the company was not a 'Sponsor' of the event. It was paid for the services it provided. Please do not remove the edit again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDennet (talk • contribs) 13:33, March 28 2007 (UTC)

Please ensure all edits are sourced, and the notability of commerical organisations verified. Check WP:ATT and WP:CORP. Oh, and please don't make comments such as "Please do not remove the edit again" without complying with Wikipedia policies yourself. Thanks, Deiz talk 13:39, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop. Continuing to add unsourced or original content is considered vandalism and may result in a block. Deiz talk 13:56, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'Edits that rely on primary sources should only make descriptive claims that can be checked by anyone without specialist knowledge.

Primary sources are documents or people close to the situation you are writing about. An eyewitness account of a traffic accident, and the White House's summary of a president's speech are primary sources. Primary source material that has been published by a reliable source may be used for the purposes of attribution in Wikipedia, but only with care, because it's easy to misuse primary sources.'

1. I was directly involved in the contract signed between Intl. SOS and LWR.

2. This fact can be checked by anyone who wishes to contact either LWR or Intl. SOS

You do the readers of Wikipedia a disservice by falsely editing this page.

'Any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia, even if misguided or ill-considered, is not vandalism' — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDennet (talk • contribs) 12:32, March 29 2007 (UTC)

International SOS, revisited

If you cannot source your edits, they do not satisy our content policies. Good faith can be questioned when facts, especially regarding a commercial organisation which you appear to be involved with, are continually reincluded without sources. And as you admit you were involved in this deal, it would appear you have a conflict of interest. I know you're extremely keen to have this little nugget of information included in Wikipedia, but you have to do it by the rules. If you're claiming that unsourced facts in Wikipedia should be allowed "because you can just ring someone up and ask" you've got it wrong. And if you're referring to the warning above as "false", it forms part of Wikipedia's warning template structure, hence any discussion about its validity should be brought up at an appropriate talkpage. Deiz talk 13:01, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

if 'your' content policies promote the supression of facts then Wikipedia has no encyclopaedic merit.

You mention your sources as the book and DVD? Both commercial vehicles yes??

The fact is that you originally referred to Sergey as a 'fixer' as that it how he was 'presented' in the book. Why was my edit allowed to properly describe him as a Security Advisor.

Is it you sir that has the conflict of interest? Does your obsession with this 'documentary' lie with your desire to promote your own organisation - Scotland? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDennet (talk • contribs) 13:24, March 29 2007 (UTC)

The book and the DVD are widely available factual, published sources, distributed by major corporations. Our content policies demand the verification of facts by reliable sources, not non-commercial ones. The New York Times isn't exactly a freesheet. I enjoyed both the book and series immensely, and took the article from a stub most of what it is today a good while ago. However, times have changed and I'm now far more experienced as an editor, as well as an administrator. Rest assured I have no personal interest (such as working for an involved company) in this debate other than keeping the article inline with WP policies. Deiz talk 13:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Why do you assume from anything that I have said that i work for International SOS? My involvement could be that I am a personal friend of either Sergey or Vasily, could it not? Your accusations are insulting.

If you insist on using the book and/or video as the only reliable sources then look at the company name emblazoned on the back of Vasilys coat. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MDennet (talk • contribs) 13:41, March 29 2007 (UTC)

I don't recall asserting that you work for this company. Your involvement is clearly direct enough to contravene WP:COI regardless of its exact nature. Stating "Vasily wears a coat with International SOS written on it" is hardly encyclopedic, and that's all that could be reliably sourced from the example you give. Deiz talk 14:00, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

And that would make this just a startling coincidence? Please respect WP:COI. Thanks, Deiz talk 13:53, 31 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Long Way Round, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged.

Wikipedia is "the encyclopedia that anyone can edit", but if you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, attribution, and autobiography.

For more details, please read the conflict of interest guideline. Thank you! Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 03:24, 3 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]