Talk:Peter George (businessman)

Connection to the subject
@Szeremeta Hi. Could you help me understand what is your connection with the article subject? On Commons, you seem to indicate that you own copyright to, a professional headshot of the subject. Given that such photos are usually work for hire, that would indicate close connection, such an employer or a family member. Could you please clarify further? Mel ma nn  21:18, 30 April 2024 (UTC)


 * Hello. The subject is my grandfather, and all photos I have uploaded to Commons are in fact owned by me. Unfortunately, I had never met the man, and I wanted to preserve his history and his legacy by making this Wikipedia page. When creating the page and sending it for approval, I recall disclosing and selecting that I was in fact a relative of the subject despite never knowing him personally. Yesterday during its initial approval, the person who reviewed and approved it made sweeping changes including removing entire sections to make it sound more neutral. Please forgive me if this is an issue or is not permitted, but my only wish is for the page to stay up in whatever capacity or with whatever tone is fit. Szeremeta (talk) 22:29, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Szeremeta Thanks for letting us know. As a family member of the subject, you're likely covered by Wikipedia's Conflict of Interest policy. I've left a template message on your talk page which contains links to relevant pages with more info, but in summary, while COI editing on Wikipedia is not outright banned, it is heavily frowned upon. At minimum, you must disclose your conflict of interest (which you've done with your message above). Generally, it is expected that you propose most edits, and another editor reviews and then implements your changes. You may use the Wikipedia's Edit requests process, there is a special type of request for COI editors. It is typically acceptable for COI editors to make direct edits only when such edits are obviously not contentious, such as correcting spelling mistakes or removal of obvious vandalism.
 * Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place suitable for righting of great wrongs. Whether the subject should have a Wikipedia article is solely determined by considering the relevant criteria for inclusion, such as the subject's notability, among others.
 * Even if @Crunchydillpickle accepted your article understanding that they were made by a COI editor, you have made subsequent COI edits, which were not in scope of the AFC review. It appears to me that you have acted in good faith, and at a cursory glance, the subject may meet the criteria for inclusion, but I strongly urge you to consider the COI policy before making any further direct edits relating to your grandfather.  Mel ma nn   23:21, 30 April 2024 (UTC)
 * @Melmann Thank you very much for your insight on this, and I appreciate the additional information regarding COI editors. In future I will be sure to review the Conflict of Interest policy and ensure I submit edit requests for major changes as opposed to directly modifying the article. I appreciate you saying I have acted in good faith, and I intend to continue that good faith for anything I do on Wikipedia in the future. I fully understand that Wikipedia is not a place for "righting wrongs", however upon reviewing that section of the Tendentious editing article, I'm not entirely certain I fit into that category (however I understand that you are far more educated on this subject than myself). I sincerely hope that the subject meets the criteria for inclusion, however I understand that such things should be determined by someone who isn't directly associated with the subject. Szeremeta (talk) 00:41, 1 May 2024 (UTC)