User:Austex/CIO Issues

With all due respect there is clearly a mistaken understanding here. The one time when I "suggested" a CIO edit (but did not make it myself as I had promised I would not) re Round Rock, Texas I did exactly as you told me and laid out the CIO very, very clearly. Here is the exact language from when I suggested the wording and then asked UNINVOLVED editors to independently vet and decide whether or not to add the edit themselves. [HERE]). I did it EXACTLY as you told me to do.... to let others decide. I also posted it on my talk page so it would not be a secret (It's also in my archive Section 7). In other words, please look at the page reference above and you will see that I did 100 percent EXACTLY and PRECISELY what you asked: "If he wants to recommend his book or wants to add himself or his projects and other interests into articles, he should be complying with COI - as he promised me he would when his block finished - and suggesting them on talk pages but then leaving it entirely up to uninvolved editors to decide whether to include."  I did EXACTLY what you wanted.  Perhaps someone has told you otherwise.  Dmartinaus  •  Talk  06:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * I also promised you I would not try to recreate the prior pages and I have not and will not. I've written NOTHING autobiographical. I've done nothing that you told me not to do. Dmartinaus  •  Talk  06:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * As for the book, it is a published, legtimate history book of Austin that anyone else would use to reference such facts. It's used by the Austin History center as a reference book. It is a perfectly acceptable reference source. I'm not trying to promote the book by it being a reference!  But if the fact is that you don't want it used because I wrote it, then that's fine.   Dmartinaus  •  Talk  06:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)
 * Lastly, NN claims repeatedy that he has not attacked me personally. Here's but one of my favorite examples: "You run a "PR" firm, the purpose of which is to control people's opinions and push corporate agendas for money against the betterment of the common man. Yeah, that's a problem all right."   I truly don't want to roll in the mud with him, especially not here, but if you'd like to see more examples of his  falsehoods you can go here. Or to see 13 examples of his name calling and attacks on me personally go hhere   Austex  •  Talk  20:59, 11 July 2010 (UTC)

Austex, if you have been honoring the promise you made to me and complying with WP:COI, why, in this and this series of edits did you add 11 references to your book? I'm astounded by your claims that you were complying with COI when the history of the page clearly shows you added them yourself. If you were complying the COI, you'd leave a note on the talk page and let others add the book if they reviewed and agreed it was a useful and reliable source, not adding it to articles yourself. Sarah 02:48, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

What??? These are references, not edits to the article wording. If you want them out I'll take them out (actually I imagine 19N has alrady reverted them all already) but don't act so "astounded." This does not seem to me to be within the scope of what we discussed, '''but if YOU think it is then LET ME KNOW. Communicate that fact to me. Instead of making it into an "astounding" accusation.''' Is there no courtesy here re communicating before accusing?????


 * I know they're references and that's what I said in my initial comment - that you added 11 references to your book to the article. No, I don't particularly want you to undo your edits now you've made them; I just want you to comply with COI. You should recommend your work, including your book, your website and any other publications you own or have written, on talk pages and then leaving it to other editors. The reason that I raised it here is that 19N made a reference above to you continuing to make COI edits since your block expired and I was very surprised about that, so I started looking around to figure out what he was talking about. Plus I think it's relevant to this discussion since that is the issue that has been the flea in 19N's ear for the last couple of months. Look, I don't want this to become a huge tangent now, I just want you to be careful that you're not making edits which promote yourself or your work. Sarah 04:36, 12 July 2010 (UTC)

There is so much more than can be accomlished here by the common courtesy of communicating FIRST, instead of attacking. I had no idea you meant the edits. I still think that is not a CIO issue, but you disagre and I' m willing to reconsider. As yu canj well imagine, putting references out for everyone to review in advance is a complicated process. In the spirit of communicating, I'll definitely give it a try. If it doesn't work well, I'll come back to you to discuss it. I would however like to get a retraction of some of the very harsh comments you made about me. 1) I did the one La Frontera edit as prescribed,and 2) on the reference edits we are now comunicting about that for the first time. Your comments above say for a fact that I have violated my promises to you and that a topic ban should be considered as well as a potential full site ban. It leaves the impression that I have been going behind your back or deliberately skitrting thje issues. I hvae almost always come to you first to discuss ideas such as the name change before initiating it.  Austex •  Talk  15:59, 12 July 2010 (UTC)