User talk:82.45.12.142

July 2020
Hello, I'm JeffSpaceman. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Doug Barrowman have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse. Thanks. JeffSpaceman (talk) 12:23, 27 July 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Hello, 82.45.12.142. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Doug Barrowman, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Bmf 051 (talk) 12:44, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

Potential Conflict of Interest
Hi. On this, you stated in your edit summary "This reference is opinion based and is currently under legal review. The article publisher is being contacted." Could you explain what you meant by the part in bold and how you know this information? Bmf 051 (talk) 20:15, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

82.45.12.142 (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC) After my edit, I wanted to be sure, I did further research, I also contacted Knox and asked the question before making the edit again, they informed me that they were already aware of this, it was under legal review and false information. I then checked the edits again along with the reference points, noted that it included personal opinions and there was no direct correlation to some of the references, I concluded that this was vandalism without grounds, hence I edited again and stated my reasoning. Wikipedia is trusted source and it's important to remove opinion and fake news especially in the time we live in. 82.45.12.142 (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2020 (UTC)
 * Do you have any relationship with Doug Barrowman or his company that might amount to a conflict of interest? It seems like far too much effort to correct a Wikipedia article, if you really have no relationship with the subject or his company. The fact that you've communicated with his company at all raises a lot of red flags. If you have a conflict of interest, you should report that appropriately. See WP:COI. Also keep in mind that sources need to be WP:VERIFIABLE and not WP:OR. Making changes to an article based on conversations you had with the subject crosses the line on both of these. Bmf 051 (talk) 13:39, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Bias opinions
Hello, thank you for adding to the article on Doug Barrowman. I am curious about your position that inclusion of information that Knox Group provided "offshore loans", as referenced in the UK Media, would potentially be "bias opinion" and "not factual" information. Are you able to explain your position so other editors can be properly informed? Thank you. Dobsonstar. Dobsonstar (talk) 20:02, 28 August 2020 (UTC)