Hi Mikec85! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC) |
Hello, Mikec85, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Rocky 734 ( talk) 01:44, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
You cannot say CONVICTION as Judge Cogburn has not made any conviction ruling. A jury ruled Lindberg guilty, however, Cogburn made no adverse ruling or conviction due to the appeal. Stating "conviction" is simply false.
- Indy beetle ( talk) 03:45, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Dear Mike,
Could you please read WP:SPA and WP:PAID and confirm that you are a single purpose account and a paid editor? If so you'll need to declare who is paying you. Please also read WP:COI and let any other editors you're working with know these rules as well.
I can confirm I am a SPA and that I'm a paid editor as I am the webmaster/administrator for www.greglindberg.com. I have the authorization to cite any material from his website. I am paid by a company called Apex International LLC. Thank you for providing me with the rules I will follow them from now on.
The general problems include copyright violations - you'll need to get releases for material that you've taken from Lindberg's websites and placed onto Wikipedia. Also just quoting Lindberg's lawyer taken from press releases or Lindberg's website doesn't work. Those are considered to be primary sources. We need material that reliable sources, such as newspapers, have mentioned. If Lindberg wants to make a plea in court, Wikipedia is not the place to make the plea, the courtroom is.
As mentioned above, I am the webmaster/administrator/copyright for www.greglindberg.com and I have the authorization to share material from Lindberg's websites.
Smallbones( smalltalk) 16:33, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Can you let me know what isn't neutral here? There any many news articles about Greg Lindberg and it seems to be equally as subjective to focus on just the alleged bribery. There have been numerous articles about Lindberg's business practices, personal and professional life. Can you kindly share why the Bribery is the sole focus here?
Mike,
Thanks for the disclosure. A minor request - please sign your edits on this page with 3 tildas ~~~ To properly declare your paid editing status please fill out the {{connected contributor (paid)}} template and copy it to the top of the Talk:Greg Lindberg page (on the 2nd line) (and to fill in the parameters),
{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=''InsertName''|U1-employer=''InsertName''|U1-client=''InsertName''|U1-otherlinks=''Insert relevant links, such as relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts written by paid editors, or diffs showing paid contributions being added to articles.''}}
The parameters should probably be filled out as follows (but please make sure that these are correct) |User1=Mikec85|U1-employer=Apex International|U1-client=Greg Lindberg|U1-otherlinks=e.g. greglindberg.com, any other employee of your employer who is editing Wikipedia on this .
and supply a clearly visible list of your paid contributions on your main user page. User:Mikec85, e.g. a list like (just fill in the proper times and dates: My paid edits
More later, Smallbones( smalltalk)
I've been looking at your question Can you kindly share why the Bribery is the sole focus here?
Ok, I understand the rules and editing requirements. To me, "Bribery Indictment/Charges" still seems very subjective. I have changed the title to "Recent Events" as that does not declare news or anything that misrepresents or promotes Mr. Lindberg. Can we agree on that title. I am working on acquiring the Yale graduation verification. I've also added the Contributor declaration on the talk page and the edits history on my page.
In response to your request for arbitration of this issue, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.
Disputes among editors regarding the content of an article should use structured discussion on the talk page between the disputing editors. However, requests for comment, third opinions and other venues are available if discussion alone does not yield a consensus. The dispute resolution noticeboard also exists as a method of resolving content disputes that aren't easily resolved with talk page discussion.
In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact a member of the community if you have more questions. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 07:35, 2 April 2020 (UTC)
Hi Mikec85! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. We hope to see you there!
Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:05, 14 November 2019 (UTC) |
Hello, Mikec85, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:
You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.
Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! Rocky 734 ( talk) 01:44, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
You cannot say CONVICTION as Judge Cogburn has not made any conviction ruling. A jury ruled Lindberg guilty, however, Cogburn made no adverse ruling or conviction due to the appeal. Stating "conviction" is simply false.
- Indy beetle ( talk) 03:45, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
Dear Mike,
Could you please read WP:SPA and WP:PAID and confirm that you are a single purpose account and a paid editor? If so you'll need to declare who is paying you. Please also read WP:COI and let any other editors you're working with know these rules as well.
I can confirm I am a SPA and that I'm a paid editor as I am the webmaster/administrator for www.greglindberg.com. I have the authorization to cite any material from his website. I am paid by a company called Apex International LLC. Thank you for providing me with the rules I will follow them from now on.
The general problems include copyright violations - you'll need to get releases for material that you've taken from Lindberg's websites and placed onto Wikipedia. Also just quoting Lindberg's lawyer taken from press releases or Lindberg's website doesn't work. Those are considered to be primary sources. We need material that reliable sources, such as newspapers, have mentioned. If Lindberg wants to make a plea in court, Wikipedia is not the place to make the plea, the courtroom is.
As mentioned above, I am the webmaster/administrator/copyright for www.greglindberg.com and I have the authorization to share material from Lindberg's websites.
Smallbones( smalltalk) 16:33, 16 December 2019 (UTC)
Can you let me know what isn't neutral here? There any many news articles about Greg Lindberg and it seems to be equally as subjective to focus on just the alleged bribery. There have been numerous articles about Lindberg's business practices, personal and professional life. Can you kindly share why the Bribery is the sole focus here?
Mike,
Thanks for the disclosure. A minor request - please sign your edits on this page with 3 tildas ~~~ To properly declare your paid editing status please fill out the {{connected contributor (paid)}} template and copy it to the top of the Talk:Greg Lindberg page (on the 2nd line) (and to fill in the parameters),
{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=''InsertName''|U1-employer=''InsertName''|U1-client=''InsertName''|U1-otherlinks=''Insert relevant links, such as relevant affiliations, disclosures, article drafts written by paid editors, or diffs showing paid contributions being added to articles.''}}
The parameters should probably be filled out as follows (but please make sure that these are correct) |User1=Mikec85|U1-employer=Apex International|U1-client=Greg Lindberg|U1-otherlinks=e.g. greglindberg.com, any other employee of your employer who is editing Wikipedia on this .
and supply a clearly visible list of your paid contributions on your main user page. User:Mikec85, e.g. a list like (just fill in the proper times and dates: My paid edits
More later, Smallbones( smalltalk)
I've been looking at your question Can you kindly share why the Bribery is the sole focus here?
Ok, I understand the rules and editing requirements. To me, "Bribery Indictment/Charges" still seems very subjective. I have changed the title to "Recent Events" as that does not declare news or anything that misrepresents or promotes Mr. Lindberg. Can we agree on that title. I am working on acquiring the Yale graduation verification. I've also added the Contributor declaration on the talk page and the edits history on my page.
In response to your request for arbitration of this issue, the Arbitration Committee has agreed that arbitration is not required at this stage. Arbitration on Wikipedia is a lengthy, complicated process that involves the unilateral adjudication of a dispute by an elected committee. Although the Committee's decisions can be useful to certain disputes, in many cases the actual process of arbitration is unenjoyable and time-consuming. Moreover, for most disputes the community maintains an effective set of mechanisms for reaching a compromise or resolving a grievance.
Disputes among editors regarding the content of an article should use structured discussion on the talk page between the disputing editors. However, requests for comment, third opinions and other venues are available if discussion alone does not yield a consensus. The dispute resolution noticeboard also exists as a method of resolving content disputes that aren't easily resolved with talk page discussion.
In all cases, you should review Wikipedia:Dispute resolution to learn more about resolving disputes on Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia community has many venues for resolving disputes and grievances, and it is important to explore them instead of requesting arbitration in the first instance. For more information on the process of arbitration, please see the Arbitration Policy and the Guide to Arbitration. I hope this advice is useful, and please do not hesitate to contact a member of the community if you have more questions. Dreamy Jazz 🎷 talk to me | my contributions 07:35, 2 April 2020 (UTC)