User talk:Peytondaley

Peytondaley, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Peytondaley! 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 Cordless Larry (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:03, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Back jacket of the book Tabloid Baby by Burt Kearns.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:Back jacket of the book Tabloid Baby by Burt Kearns.jpg, which you've attributed to Celebrity Books. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described in section F11 of the criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. — Diannaa 🍁 (talk) 12:27, 25 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Orphaned non-free image File:Burt KearnsJoeyRamone.jpg

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Burt KearnsJoeyRamone.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 18:12, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Peytondaley. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Burt Kearns, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
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 must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:33, 29 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), such as at Talk:Burt Kearns, please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment, or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:24, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

What is your connection to Burt Kearns? The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:57, 3 June 2018 (UTC) fan of his work as author and producer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2605:E000:8553:1F00:E557:FED1:F49A:AC84 (talk) 20:30, 3 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear from things that you have said in more than one edit that you have a closer connection than that. You have made it unambiguous that you know him and that he has communicated with you in connection with content you have posted to Wikipedia. Please state precisely what your connection to him is. Also, assuming that the message above was posted by Peytondaley, in future please log into your account when you edit, to avoid any doubt about whether edits are from you or not. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:49, 4 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May I ask why you are harassing me? Yes, I ‘know” him. yes I am a fan of his work. How else does a wikipedia post get written unless one knows about the subject being written about? Do I pick out a stranger and copy what I see online? This is ridiculous. I get no money. I am not in his employ. I am posting the accmplishments of someone I admire. i dont understand why you have targeted me. I am doing what a wikipedia contributor is supposed to do, posting neutral information about a subject I am familiar with. I am not “promoting” anything. May I ask, do you have a supervisor? I would like to contact him or her. I do not appreciate this grilling over an entry about which there is no problem and, since you are using a pseudonym, I am beginning wonder if Iknow you and consider this a form of harassment.User:PeytonDaley

I shall try to clarify the issues involved. I hope what I say will be helpful to you.

I am not "harassing" you: I am simply asking you to state the nature of your connection to Burt Kearns. I am not the only person to ask you to do so. You have made statements which show that you have a personal connection to him, such as telling us that he sent you an image which you then uploaded to Wikipedia. That being so, then, as explained above, you need to take note of the guidelines on conflict of interest. Editors who have a close connection to a subject about which they are writing, such as personally knowing a person who is the subject of an article they edit, should be totally transparent and be willing to disclose the nature of their connection. That is not something which I personally have made up, it is a matter of Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You have already told us that you know Burt Kearns and that you have been in personal contact with him in relation to content you have posted to Wikipedia, which is fine: thanks for telling us that. It would be helpful if you gave us more specific details of the nature of your connection to him, and I don't know why you are reluctant to do so, nor why you regard asking you to do so as harassing you.

In answer to what you said above about "pick[ing] out a stranger", most editing of Wikipedia articles about people is indeed done by people who do not personally know the subjects of those articles, and moreover that is the preferred method. Experience over the years shows that someone with a personal connection to the subject they are writing about is likely to find it difficult to stand back from the subject and see how their own writing will seem to uninvolved outsiders. A consequence of that is that such a person's writing is likely to appear non-neutral to others, even if the person sincerely believes that they are writing neutrally. That is, in fact, one of the main reasons why the conflict of interest guideline discourages such editing about someone one knows personally. Other reasons are, of course, indicated in that guideline.

I advise you to read the conflict of interest guideline, if you have not already done so, and to make sure that you comply with its requirements.

One other point. Please don't remove the conflict of interest notice from the article Burt Kearns again. The article has been substantially edited by two people who come under Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines, yourself and another editor who has identified himself, and made it clear that he has a connection to Burt Kearns. The fact that that editor has made his connection to Burt Kearns clear is, of course, in line with the relevant Wikipedia guidelines and policies.

As I indicated above, I hope that what I have said will help to clarify the issues for you, but please feel welcome to ask if there are still any matters which need further clarification. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 20:42, 5 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mr Watson, I refuse to give you personal information about myself. You and you alone have been bothering me after I told you I have no conflict of interest with the subject. Having read the man's book, being influenced by it, working in the same industry, having met him, and knowing of him, is my “relationship.” I already told you this. Out of the millions of wikipedia entries, I cannot beieve you have fixated on this, and on me in particular. May I ask you bluntly: Do you know me? Do we work in the same office? I fear there may be some connection here. Until you come out from behind your pseudonym, I will not respond to you. I have answered your questions. There is NOTHING that is not neutral in this entry. I don’t understand how you have the time to write such insulting long mansplanations, except to engage me. Now it is becoming harassment. Leave. Me. Alone. User:PeytonDaley

Since you have asked two more questions, I shall answer them. No, I don't know you, and no, we don't work in the same office.

Since you have indicated that my attempts to help you by explaining policies and guidelines are unwelcome, I shall make no more attempt to explain them to you, but I do advise you to read the policy on edit warring. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:40, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When I wrote my first message above, I assumed you were a good faith editor who had not fully grasped the meaning of the message from Drm310 about conflict of interest. Rather than post a warning about a possible block from editing, which might have seemed intimidating, I simply asked you for information about your connection to Burt Kearns, so that I would know how better to advise you. Despite the fact that your answer was evasive, I continued to assume you were acting in good faith, and therefore put a significant amount of time into trying to advise you, which I would not have done had I thought that you were not acting in good faith. However, years of experience indicate that your belligerent and angry response to my attempts to help were not what usually comes from good faith editors, but is a common kind of response from editors who are not being straightforward. That prompted me to look further into the matter, and I found unambiguous evidence that you have closer connections both to Burt Kearns and to the editor "The Real Sam Peters" (formerly "Good Story Productions") than you have admitted. I have therefore blocked you indefinitely from editing. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of this page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks before doing so. My preference would be to post the evidence here, for full transparency to other Wikipedia editors, but Wikipedia policy does not permit me to do so. However, I am keeping the evidence on file, and if you do request an unblock I shall be happy to email it to the administrator who reviews your request. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 11:08, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

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

UTRS appeal #21743 was submitted on Jun 06, 2018 17:36:58. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 17:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC) Hello. I dont feel I should be blocked. I have been hounded by a user who calls him (her) self JamesBWatson. This person asked if I had a conflict of interest with Burt Kearns; I said I did not. I know of him, his work and have updated his page with his credits. I have done this with others. When I told Watson I did not work for or was paid by Keanrs, he continued to press me for personal information, as to my relationship with him. The amount of time this person focused on me, out of thousands of wikipedia contributors, and the fact this person uses a pseudonym, leads me to believe he may work in my office or know me personally. I do not deserve to be blocked. I am hurting no one, not posting lies, only facts. i told Watson my connection to the person. I know his work. I read his book. He is well known in my circle, my industry. That is my connection. What else does he want from me? I do not wish to reveal more about myself, just as Watson hides behind a pseudonym, I wish to maintain my privacy. JamesBWatson is harassing me. Peytondaley (talk) 18:53, 6 June 2018 (UTC)Peytondaley[reply]