User talk:Tyler at OCSO

Please change your username

In accordance with Wikipedia:Username policy, organizations are not allowed to have accounts on Wikipedia. Only individuals can have accounts.

To avoid your account being blocked for this policy violation, please go to WP:CHU/Simple ASAP and request a change of username that represents only you as an individual, not your employer. If you want your username to retain a connection to your employer, it's acceptable to propose a username like "Sam at OaklandCountySherrifsOffice" or "Janet at OCSO" or something similar, as long as it is clear that the username is owned and operated by one person only. If multiple people access this account, then the account is considered "compromised" and subject to immediate blocking. ~Amatulić (talk) 21:41, 23 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, OaklandCountySheriffsOffice. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Mike Bouchard, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 13:31, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING THIS INFORMATION TO ME. THE EDITS I HAVE MADE ARE OF A FACTUAL NATURE AND SIMPLY OUTLINE AWARDS, EDUCATION, AND SPONSORED LEGILSATION (ALL OF WHICH IS AVAILAIBLE VIA THE OAKLAND COUNTY WEBSITE). I TRUST THESE EDITS DO NOT COME ACROSS AS BIAS IN ANY WAY BEING THAT THEY ARE ALL FACTS OBTAINED FROM A RELIABLE SOURCE. AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING SOME GUIDANCE IN THIS MATTER AS I AM RELATIVELY NEW TO WIKIPEDIA EDITING — Preceding unsigned comment added by 12.219.232.53 (talk) 13:40, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Your addition has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 14:26, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove the {{copyvio}} template from articles. Your action has been reverted. For legal reasons, we cannot accept non-free text or images borrowed from other websites or printed material; such additions will be deleted, and removing copyright notices will not help your case. You can properly contest the deletion at Wikipedia:Copyright problems. If you are the owner of the material, you may release the material under the Creative Commons and GFDL licenses, as detailed at WP:IOWN. Alternatively, you are welcome to create a draft in your own words at a temporary subpage linked from the article. If you continue to insert copyright violations and/or remove copyright notices, you may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 15:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Mike Bouchard shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Theroadislong (talk) 15:35, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm attempting to update information following the direction of the Subject, Sheriff Michael J. Bouchard. Th information I'm attempting to include is of a factual basis including only the information from his biography, which was compiled by myself and with the assistance colleagues. I am having difficulty understanding why this information cannot be published being that I have compiled this information personally and at the request of the Sheriff himself. My edits, again, are of factual nature and do not impress any bias opinions or misinformation in any way. I was asked to update this page because the information was outdated. If I myself cannot update this page, then who has the authority to do so? Thank you in advance for resolving this issue.

I AM THE ORIGINAL COMPILER/WRITER OF THE INFORMATION PUBLISHED ON THE WEBSITE http://www.oakgov.com/sheriff/Pages/about/bio_bouchard.aspx WHY AM I BEING DENIED THE OPPORTUNITY TO PUBLISH THIS INFORMATION ON WIKIPEDIA? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyler at OCSO (talk • contribs) 15:50, 24 September 2014‎ (UTC)[reply]

If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. Theroadislong (talk) 15:51, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If you have compiled the information personally, then you should not add it to the article. Wikipedia is not a place to publish original research, and your compilation of Bouchard's biography counts as research. Articles should be built on published reliable sources. Further, if you have compiled the information at the direction of the sheriff, there is at least the appearance of a lack of neutrality because of the conflict of interest, regardless of how careful you are to keep a neutral point of view in your writing.

Note that I mention published reliable sources. If you maintain a website for Bouchard or the Sheriff's Office, then that website qualifies as a published source. It may then be used by other, independent editors as a reference (although there are limitations with what can be used, since the (office of) the sheriff is self-publishing the website). —C.Fred (talk) 15:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

If the information I'm attempting to publish is compiled factual information available to the public, than how am I denied the opportunity to update the page? So am I to understand that a complete stranger (neutral party) can edit this page, but myself at the directorate of the subject, cannot add factual public information as it may be construed as a bias? Please help me to understand this as I cannot see how disallowing factual public information to be included on a wikipedia page violates policy as this website seeks to provide factual information to its users. Thank You in advance

Please read Wikipedia is not a place to publish your resume. Brianhe (talk) 16:12, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It does not attempt to publish all factual information that exists - see WP:NOT. Pragmatically, why not just add a link to the website in the article? Assuming it's the sheriff's official website, that should be acceptable per WP:EXT, and you'd only have one webpage to keep up-to-date. —SMALL JIM 16:16, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

So just so I'm clear on this, Wikipedia seeks to deny factual information from being published? So for instance if I was a complete stranger (neutral party) I could access any page I feel like and make edits as I see fit and call them factual? So why should anyone trust the information provided on this website? Who classifies it as fiction or reality? By all means, educate me on the purpose of this website as if new factual content cannot be added on a subject by those most educated on it, then why publish anything at all?

It's probably best if you now spend some time carefully reading the above messages and also reading the helpful guidelines and policies that people have linked for you. Then you'll understand how Wikipedia works. —SMALL JIM 16:29, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not delete or edit legitimate talk page comments, as you did at Talk:Mike Bouchard. Such edits are disruptive and appear to be vandalism. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:33, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Tyler at OCSO, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Tyler at OCSO! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Come join other new editors at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a space where new editors can get help from other new editors. These editors have also just begun editing Wikipedia; they may have had similar experiences as you. Come share your experiences, ask questions, and get advice from your peers. I hope to see you there! I JethroBT (I'm a Teahouse host)

Visit the Teahouse

This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend, HostBot (talk) 16:11, 25 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]