User talk:142.167.54.113

February 2023
Hello, I'm MrOllie. Wikipedia is written by people who have a wide diversity of opinions, but we try hard to make sure articles have a neutral point of view. Your recent edit seemed less than neutral and has been removed. If you think this was a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 12:15, 27 February 2023 (UTC)


 * The edit corrected mistakes.. it was neutral. The old reference linked to a page that did not exist, and also incorrectly stated that the Origins Project at ASU had been renamed, which was not true. Instead the mission of the original origins project iss now carried out by a non-profit organization. I don't understand how this is not neutral.. it is purely factual. 142.167.54.113 (talk) 14:20, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * the accurate point is that the origins project was ended by ASU, not that I was removed from it. It did not continue to exist there.. 142.167.54.113 (talk) 14:22, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * It was obvious POV pushing. We cannot say the claims were 'discredited' in Wikivoice based only on Krauss's own word. MrOllie (talk) 14:26, 27 February 2023 (UTC)
 * yes.. understood.. language is now neutral. thanks. my earlier remarks were related to the change describing the origins project in a different section. 142.167.54.113 (talk) 14:48, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Please do not add commentary, your own point of view, or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. Thank you. MrOllie (talk) 14:46, 27 February 2023 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did at Lawrence Krauss, you may be blocked from editing. MrOllie (talk) 15:08, 28 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello 142.167.54.113. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:142.167.54.113. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. MrOllie (talk) 17:15, 28 February 2023 (UTC)


 * I certainly was not receiving compensation for my edits.. In any case, I moved discussion to the talk page as you requested. 142.167.54.113 (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2023 (UTC)