User talk:Raymondfrancais

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Raymondfrancais. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Charles Karel Bouley, 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, clients, 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 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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Do you know Karel, or are connected with him in any way? If so, you should not edit his page. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have previously stated on Wikimedia Commons that you are Mr. Bouley's publicist. You may not edit the page about him per our COI policies, and it does not belong to him or you. If you would like to, you are welcome to make suggestions about the article on its talk page. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:40, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I stated that years ago. I haven't worked for him in some time. I simply don't like misinformation or those editing with agendas. Every correction made is factual, and sourced. I do not work with him and haven't spoken to him in years. I do get notifications about his page and saw the changes made. When I saw that the page had been gutted and most of his hard earned experience taken off, I felt compelled to replace it. Again, I am neither promoting him, do not work with him and haven't spoken to him in years. We have no personal relationship. Raymondfrancais (talk) 00:44, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you are telling the truth (and I will assume good faith here), then as recently as two years ago you were an employee of Mr. Bouley's paid to look after his image, and you edited the Wikipedia article about him before and after that time (and most likely during). That was already a violation of Wikipedia's policies. The page is not a resume and does not need to provide every detail of his career - it is an encyclopedic summary of what reliable, secondary sources have written. The page has not been gutted, it has been improved. If you would like to seek a third opinion in this dispute, I would welcome you to post to WP:3O to get one. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:48, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

yes, two years ago. I am not in his employ now, we do not speak. And I have every right to edit the page. You seem to have an agenda and yes, I will raise this to every level. You are removing documented Stage, Recording and talk show history as well as not documenting the real events. Raymondfrancais (talk) 00:50, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm happy to take your suggestions for improving the article if you make them on the talk page. Again, if you wish to try to resolve the dispute, you could post about it on the WP:3O page. Further escalation would be to WP:ANI, but I think that would probably be very premature at this point. However, I would strongly urge you to stop editing the article. If you genuinely want it to get better, work with me on the talk page, and don't just keep restoring material in violation of Wikipedia's COI policies. —Ganesha811 (talk) 00:56, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am not in violation of the policies. I do not work with him, have never been paid by him, and haven't spoken to him. I have already done the WP:3O and will do a WP:ANI if you continue to remove edits made by a private person about a national LGBTQ figure during pride month. You are not the owner or arbiter of this page just as you pointed out I am not. Every change made is factual, and sourced. Why are you removing them? Do you not like this person? Why not just cut and paste them yourself, since they are real? What is your agenda in removing them? Are you a homophobe? A Conservative? It appears you have an agenda. Raymondfrancais (talk) 01:01, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Raymondfrancais, if there is one thing that many Wikipedia editors get sick and tired of it's being accused of having an "agenda" when someone doesn't agree with them. I haven't even looked into the actual dispute, but I will tell you that if you make one more comment like this, one more such personal attack, I will block you. And if you are wondering where that comes from: WP:AGF means that you should accept that they are acting in good faith. Drmies (talk) 01:05, 6 June 2023 (UTC) And do not paste an article in here. First of all you're violating Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia, secondly it's not what talk pages are for, and thirdly you put your talk page in the category for LGBT comedians. Drmies (talk) 01:06, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So you are threatening me because someone keeps removing facts from a page? They are not acting in good faith. The links at the bottom are wrong. Some of the sources are wrong. Three sections are missing and they keep removing them. Again, why? The information is sourced, factual, I do not work for this person, do not speak to them, so why are my edits not valid? Raymondfrancais (talk) 01:07, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I am telling you that if you continue to make personal attacks (and you just did it again) I am going to block you. User:Ganesha811 has been here for years and knows what decent sourcing means--you have spent most of your time on this one article, and you haven't even found the talk page yet. If you were the subject's publicist years ago, then it is safe to assume that you still have a conflict of interest, because that stands to reason, and a COI is not dependent on someone being paid. So since you've been given the option to declare your COI formally, but haven't done so, and since you continue to edit the article in a favorable manner and not corresponding to our policies, I am going to block you from editing that article: you are welcome to argue your point(s) on the talk page. Drmies (talk) 01:13, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Raymondfrancais, the key thing to understand is this; just because something is true, or factual, doesn't mean it belongs on Wikipedia. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia built on reliable, secondary, sources. It provides summary-style articles on notable topics. I believe, from what I've seen, that Karel is notable. However, that doesn't mean that everything about his career or life is notable, or that bad sources become good ones (see here for determining what a good source is). You could also take a look at WP:NOTRESUME. Articles should be well-written, well-sourced, and clear, not masses of trivial detail. —Ganesha811 (talk) 01:19, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

So you are not interested in the article being correct? Just who puts it there? And before the dispute is even resolved you block me? I am asking questions. Why do you keep taking out factual, well-sourced sections on Recording, on Television on his WORK and HISTORY that any other page has? It is fair to ask if it's personal given that they are making no effort to make the page correct. The links at the bottom are wrong. Some of the sources are wrong. Discographies are on Wikipedia under recording artists. Television series are on Wikipedia pages of people in them. Why erase that? I have posted them on the Talk page, why do you not put them on Karel's main page. You only talk of radio and two books, not 60 episodes of television, seven singles, an acclaimed album. Why? Raymondfrancais (talk) 01:21, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Why--why--why--well, if you hadn't been so disruptive those questions might have been addressed, but the first thing that needs to happen is the restoration of peace to the article. And all these angry posts here, the time you spent on them could have been spent on properly declaring your COI, explaining edits on the talk page, or finding reliable secondary sources--not IMDB, not Discogs. Drmies (talk) 01:35, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I have no desire to be cross with you. But the LGBT community is under attack this Pride month and it just seemed odd that these changes were made now. I have posted a request on the Talk page, I believe that is the right thing to do. He has made history as a recording artist and on TV being openly gay and it's important to note those contributions I would think. Again, I have no issue with you or Ganesh, I just want it to be correct. Also, the source for the appellate court, there's and advocate story detailing it all. How should I provide that link. And what are reliable secondary sources if not THE source for shows, like IMDB and Discogs that show when the items were released. I'm open to helping find those sources but what are considered reliable secondary sources? How is a newspaper article more reliable than an actual discography? Or IMDB? Wikipedia also has the shows and discography but Wikipedia itself can't be used. So what can? Raymondfrancais (talk) 01:38, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - regarding IMDB and Discogs, please see my comment on the talk page. They are not considered reliable, by long-standing consensus of many Wikipedia editors. —Ganesha811 (talk) 17:27, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

June 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Charles Karel Bouley) for undeclared COI editing.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text at the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 01:14, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

3O decline

I have declined your submission at WP:3O. It was malformatted and non-neutral (please read the rules at that page before re-filing), but most importantly, you provided no evidence that there's been any discussion and that you've deadlocked with another party. You're welcome to pursue other forms of dispute resolution. DonIago (talk) 02:08, 6 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]