|
Hi, If you are working for Nova Publishers then you have a conflict of interest and should better refrain from editing that article. You can propose changes on the article's talk page and if reasonable, other editors will make them for you. Thanks. -- Randykitty ( talk) 17:52, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Randy,
Thank you for your email message. I'm confused as to why you are concerned about factual information being posted when there are sources to back it up. There is no conflict of interest if this is what you are concerned about. Not everybody shares the same point of view that you do regarding this company.
I would like to understand what you have against the History and Imprints of the Company being posted on Wikipedia? Please see Springer, if you have doubts whether Imprints (or history) should be posted. I can also give you other links.
If you are worried that this information is not factual, I would more than happy to try to get you this information through records. Just provide me your address.
Thank you. Anna
Dear Moonlet (?),
Thank you for your email message. It is indeed, one and the same! If it makes you feel better, a third party can also continue to deal with this issue.
There seems to be a conflict of interest with your posts as well, please look up the conflict of interest fact page. The purpose of Wikipedia it to produce neutral, reliably sourced data. Your deletion of posts seem to be fighting against the very same.
Adding information that is not agreed upon by you or your team seems to be an ongoing issue. And while it is flattering that you are constantly checking the Nova webpage, it seems a bit unfair and disappointing that you believe it is OK to delete factual information about a company, to the point of harassment.
Best regards, Anna
Dear Moonlet, I'm afraid you are getting a bit off topic. I initially had one question and it would be nice if you answered it. You seem to have an issue with factual information [i.e., Imprints, History] being added on the page. I would be interested to know why. I haven't gotten a good answer yet.
You seem to have an issue with neutral information. This is really unfortunate.
Many of our Editors brought complaints about you and several others on Wikipedia. This is how I got involved unfortunately. Thank you for all the links - I will read every one of them.
Best regards, Anna
I'm sorry. I do not understand your relevance to Charles Manson.
Randykitty, you continue to delete basic information from reliable sources (if you do not consider me a reliable source, posts from others are readily available in history, and whom again, you delete their information on). Although you bring it up to not be personal, it seems like for you indeed, it is personal.
Thank you, but I do not need your approval to post something although you may think that I do.
""As for the "neutral" information that you want to insert, some of it is trivial (who cares that your company hired somebody who came from Springer, people in this business move around all the time)"" Wow. Really? Please look at other publishing sites. I'm afraid that even though it's not interesting to you, people do care.
I would love to discuss more about this, but there's simply no time. Unfortunately, it seems like the basic fairness that I was expecting on the Talk Page will simply not happen. I will tell the Editors to contact their lawyers or Nova lawyers to correspond directly with Wikipedia.
I hope you continue to follow Nova.
Anna
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. De728631 ( talk) 23:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi AnnaCRittenberg!! We want to invite you to play The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive game that can help you become a great contributor to Wikipedia. It's a fun interstellar journey, and you'll learn how to edit Wikipedia in about an hour. We hope to see you there! This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend,
HostBot (
talk)
18:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
|
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
In particular, you have violated the three-revert rule. I don't know how much leniency you may receive because you appear to be new, but you must undo your last edit at Nova Science Publishers or you are at risk of being blocked. -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 19:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
|
Hi, If you are working for Nova Publishers then you have a conflict of interest and should better refrain from editing that article. You can propose changes on the article's talk page and if reasonable, other editors will make them for you. Thanks. -- Randykitty ( talk) 17:52, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Randy,
Thank you for your email message. I'm confused as to why you are concerned about factual information being posted when there are sources to back it up. There is no conflict of interest if this is what you are concerned about. Not everybody shares the same point of view that you do regarding this company.
I would like to understand what you have against the History and Imprints of the Company being posted on Wikipedia? Please see Springer, if you have doubts whether Imprints (or history) should be posted. I can also give you other links.
If you are worried that this information is not factual, I would more than happy to try to get you this information through records. Just provide me your address.
Thank you. Anna
Dear Moonlet (?),
Thank you for your email message. It is indeed, one and the same! If it makes you feel better, a third party can also continue to deal with this issue.
There seems to be a conflict of interest with your posts as well, please look up the conflict of interest fact page. The purpose of Wikipedia it to produce neutral, reliably sourced data. Your deletion of posts seem to be fighting against the very same.
Adding information that is not agreed upon by you or your team seems to be an ongoing issue. And while it is flattering that you are constantly checking the Nova webpage, it seems a bit unfair and disappointing that you believe it is OK to delete factual information about a company, to the point of harassment.
Best regards, Anna
Dear Moonlet, I'm afraid you are getting a bit off topic. I initially had one question and it would be nice if you answered it. You seem to have an issue with factual information [i.e., Imprints, History] being added on the page. I would be interested to know why. I haven't gotten a good answer yet.
You seem to have an issue with neutral information. This is really unfortunate.
Many of our Editors brought complaints about you and several others on Wikipedia. This is how I got involved unfortunately. Thank you for all the links - I will read every one of them.
Best regards, Anna
I'm sorry. I do not understand your relevance to Charles Manson.
Randykitty, you continue to delete basic information from reliable sources (if you do not consider me a reliable source, posts from others are readily available in history, and whom again, you delete their information on). Although you bring it up to not be personal, it seems like for you indeed, it is personal.
Thank you, but I do not need your approval to post something although you may think that I do.
""As for the "neutral" information that you want to insert, some of it is trivial (who cares that your company hired somebody who came from Springer, people in this business move around all the time)"" Wow. Really? Please look at other publishing sites. I'm afraid that even though it's not interesting to you, people do care.
I would love to discuss more about this, but there's simply no time. Unfortunately, it seems like the basic fairness that I was expecting on the Talk Page will simply not happen. I will tell the Editors to contact their lawyers or Nova lawyers to correspond directly with Wikipedia.
I hope you continue to follow Nova.
Anna
There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you.
Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. De728631 ( talk) 23:48, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi AnnaCRittenberg!! We want to invite you to play The Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive game that can help you become a great contributor to Wikipedia. It's a fun interstellar journey, and you'll learn how to edit Wikipedia in about an hour. We hope to see you there! This message was delivered automatically by your robot friend,
HostBot (
talk)
18:05, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
|
You currently appear to be engaged in an
edit war. Users are expected to
collaborate with others, to avoid editing
disruptively, and to
try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.
Please be particularly aware, Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states:
If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing.
In particular, you have violated the three-revert rule. I don't know how much leniency you may receive because you appear to be new, but you must undo your last edit at Nova Science Publishers or you are at risk of being blocked. -- BlueMoonlet ( t/ c) 19:31, 27 November 2013 (UTC)