User talk:Dirk Wickenden

Welcome

Hello Dirk Wickenden and welcome to Wikipedia! We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your contributions do not conform to our policies. For more information on this, see Wikipedia's policies on vandalism and limits on acceptable additions. If you'd like to experiment with the wiki's syntax, please do so in the sandbox (but beware that the contents of the sandbox are deleted frequently) rather than in articles.

If you still have questions, there is a Help desk, or you can click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Help pages
Tutorial
Task Center – need some ideas of what kind of things need doing?

I hope you enjoy editing and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! VViking_TalkEdits 13:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unsourced

Hello, I'm Canterbury Tail. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at referencing for beginners. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Canterbury Tail talk 13:40, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

July 2024

Hello, I'm Doniago. I wanted to let you know that I removed one or more external links you added to the main body of Michael Kamen. Generally, any relevant external links should be listed in an "External links" section at the end of the article and meet the external links guidelines. Links within the body of an article should be internal wikilinks. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Also, please provide a secondary source regarding the information you wish to add, as a means of establishing its significance. DonIago (talk) 13:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies but it's all rather confusing, how to edit things with lots of [ ] and { } etc. I thought my source was fine and my report on the event was factual, as I was there and it is an important part of the Kamen legacy. Dirk Wickenden (talk) 14:11, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please review the notifications left for you below this thread as well as the response I left for you at my Talk page. DonIago (talk) 14:15, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I still don't understand what the problem is? Dirk Wickenden (talk) 14:17, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both the notice below and the responses I left for you on my Talk page point out that you have a conflict of interest with regard to the information you're attempting to add. If you don't understand how that's a problem, I'm not sure how much further I can assist you. DonIago (talk) 14:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand conflict of interest? Dirk Wickenden (talk) 14:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you don't understand what a conflict of interest is even after reading the notice below and the information I left for you at my Talk page, then my only advice to you is that you avoid making any edits to areas of this project in which you have a vested personal interest, such as editing Kamen's page to specifically include something where you played a role.

If you continue to make edits that appear to be motivated by a conflict of interest, you're likely to be blocked from editing further. DonIago (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you but steady on, it's all a bit harsh and uncalled for. An edit from a year or so ago went through no problem about another subject that I was involved in and is still there. But feel free to block me, I don't mind being a martyr. Bring back the Encyclopedia Britannica hardback! Better than the internet. Dirk Wickenden (talk) 14:27, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

COI

Hello, Dirk Wickenden. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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 article subjects 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 {{edit COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting your suggestions;
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. Thank you.VViking_TalkEdits 14:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

and

Disruptive

Please stop your disruptive editing.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

If you continue to disrupt Wikipedia, you may be blocked from editing. VViking_TalkEdits 14:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't been disruptive at all, I was providing factual, correct information, pertinent to the subject. Just look how often I have contributed to Wikipedia - hardly ever. I often see totally false information on Wikipedia (not releating to the subject I was editing) but it seems to remain - if something is erroneous - unlike my edits - how do I go about reporting those? It appears I am being discriminated against for some obscure reason and I've done nothing wrong. Dirk Wickenden (talk) 14:14, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Michael Kamen, this is the link on the Vents magazine site that you meant to provide, showing coverage of the event in question: https://ventsmagazine.com/2016/07/01/mosma-festival-day-12-recap%e2%80%8f/

It's not a terrible source, but it's difficult for me to evaluate its reliability. It appears to be only 15 years old, with little information on who's behind it or its editorial policy. Wikipedia defines a reliable source as having an established reputation for fact-checking and editorial oversight. This heavily favours established, mainstream news organizations, academic press, and reputable publishers of newspapers, books and magazines.

The link shows that you had a previously undisclosed relationship with the subject's estate. This is absolutely a conflict of interest and should have been disclosed beforehand. What isn't clear is if your position with the estate is a paid one. If you are being compensated for your work with them, then this is a paid relationship which you are required to disclose per Wikipedia's mandatory and non-negotiable paid editing disclosure policy. In either case, the proper way to make edits to articles where you have a conflict of interest is to follow the procedure for making edit requests. This gives independent editors a chance to review the proposed changes before they are published, or sent back to you for further revision.

As for your edits to James Burke (science historian) and Clifford Earl, these appear to be based on your own personal knowledge. Wikipedia policy dictates that unpublished personal knowledge or experience (referred to here as original research) is disallowed, because it is inherently unverifiable. Quite simply, if something has never been published in a reliable source, it cannot exist on Wikipedia, even if you know or believe it to be true. Verifiability, not truth takes priority here.

This is probably why others have labelled your edits as disruptive - although I am sure that was not your intention. You would benefit from following some of the links on the Help:Contents page. Becoming familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and general editing culture will increase your chances of your edits being constructive. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 15:10, 24 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]