Talk:Timothy A. Chey

Conflict of interest
I'm adding the COI template to this article because the article creator,, states in their edit summary here that "we're the official publicists for Mr. Chey. We appreciate any 'verifiable' additions". The promotional tone of the article is fairly obvious. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 12:12, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

re: last post
Dear Friend, Everyone should be able to contribute to Wikipedia. The problem comes when people 'skew' things to suit some agenda. However, not everyone is a part of that agenda and by issuing 'COI' tags, when they are not COIs, can hurt an individual exposed to the public. It's great to be incognito and change people's bios, but I think upon reflection there's something wrong with being the 'sole' source of someone's bio and if someone adds or deletes, then they have to be accountable to someone 'in charge' of the bio. This is not in the spirit of Wikipedia, is it? I'm not entirely certain of that purpose either. I'm not trying to get anyone worked up or mad, I'm just trying to be honest with you and share my opinions. I respect you and see your a great editor. If another person purposefully 'skews' his point of view by including only negative reviews of the film in question, for instance, how is that fair and democratic in the spirit of Wikipedia? Why someone is 'obsessed' with another person's biography is puzzling, but again, I'm trying to find answers without causing contempt or animosity among the various editors. You seem extremely intelligent and I have a great deal of respect for you. If there's something I can do to resolve the situation, please let me know. Warmest regards, Pastor Greg —Preceding unsigned comment added by PastorGreg (talk • contribs) 06:05, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * See the section above entitled "Conflict of interest". Thanks. Delicious carbuncle (talk) 14:42, 30 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Dear Pastor--I am afraid I cannot agree with your edits on Genius Club and Impact. First of all, the Dove Family Seal is hardly a measure of the movie's quality--it simply is a rating. Secondly, and more importantly, it's fine that you toss in a positive review of Impact, but that changes the sentence completely--the surprise is that a Christian reviewer gave it a negative review, and you have made it sound like just another Christian vs. liberal (good vs. evil,GOOD WINS AND BAD GETS PUNISHED2602:306:37E1:E660:4918:31DC:53D5:96BD (talk) 23:40, 19 November 2014 (UTC)K WROTE) kind of thing, everything according to party lines so to speak. I might could say that you have skewed the sentence to promote an agenda. The point was that Impact apparently is not automatically reviewed favorably by Christian reviewers because it's a Christian movie. I am going to re-edit the sentence to try and make that point. Thanks. Drmies (talk) 19:01, 30 September 2008 (UTC)

== Fact check ==

I agree with the assessment that this is a conflict of interest, as it was clearly written from a non-objective point of view, and under most circumstances would have been thrown out for a lack of notability. It lists schools he attended or were accepted to, but doesn't list any degrees earned. He may as well have listed schools he thought about going to for all that it means. Is this really worthy of a wikipedia article, especially one with a photo and multiple sections? I thought this site was trying to get people to take it seriously as a source, not as a collection of self-serving publicity pages with skewed information. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.228.65.247 (talk) 15:39, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

≈≈ JUST TO KNOW ≈≈ THIS SITE IN MY OPINION HELPS ME ALOT AND SOMETIMES NOT. IS THIS SITE SIRIOUS OR NOT?