User talk:96.61.0.138

December 2017
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Marc Anthony Richardson, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Someone claiming to be the subject not only wrote the article but removed the citation needed tags, and you don't see a problem with the article? It's more that a bit odd that a new IP who has only ever edited the same articles as the user who claims to be the subject shows up and removes the COI tag. Meters (talk) 19:32, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Hello, 96.61.0.138. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Marc Anthony Richardson, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. 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, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * 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 must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. The COI also applies to you, even if you are not Richardson. Since you have variously claimed to both be Richardson and to be an associate of his, I am assuming that this is not only  a COI issue but likely a WP:PAID issue. This also applies to Stream of consciousness (narrative mode) and the other articles. Meters (talk) 19:58, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

Please stop continuing to remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Marc Anthony Richardson, without resolving the problem that the template refers to. This may be considered disruptive editing. Further edits of this type may result in your account being blocked from editing. CLCStudent (talk) 22:08, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so you can avoid further irrelevant notices.

Do not use multiple IP addresses to vandalize Wikipedia. Such attempts to avoid detection or circumvent the blocking policy will not succeed. You are welcome to contribute constructively to Wikipedia but your recent edits have been reverted or removed. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia '''you may be blocked from editing without further notice. '''Meters (talk) 00:24, 7 December 2017 (UTC)
 * You are obviously now also using User:69.6.126.46. If you keep this up all of the accounts will likely be blocked.  My wp:AGF is done. Meters (talk) 00:21, 7 December 2017 (UTC)

What resources do you need to have this article "cleaned up", for the tagged to be removed? The novel does use stream of conscious techniques, however reviewers only allude to it. Here's two interviews that come the closest to saying stream of consciousness: https://entropymag.org/interview-with-marc-anthony-richardson/

Another is a jazz radio interview: https://kdvs.org/playlist-details/41287/

here an revieew that refers to "automatic writing style": https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/marc-anthony-richardson/year-rat/

Otherwise I maybe you can just delete the word "stream of consciousness."

There are no references for the literary influences, so that could be deleted too.96.61.0.138 (talk) 00:16, 14 December 2017 (UTC)


 * You have already asked this question on your other IP's talk page. I replied there, and you said that you understood . Asking again is not going to change the answer. When editors with no COI have reviewed your contributions and cleaned up the article the COI notice on the page itself will be removed. The COI notice on the talk page will not be removed. Read and follow WP:PAID. I'm still waiting for you to make your mandatory paid editor declaration.I'm not going to look at the article until you do so. Meters (talk) 06:24, 14 December 2017 (UTC)

I am not a paid editor.96.61.0.138 (talk) 09:19, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
 * As I said, my WP:AGF is used up. Maybe you are not a paid editor, but which version of who you are would you have us believe? You state here that you created the article, which means you are user:Malaou. (In case you didn't realize, erasing the statement from your page  does not hide the edit. It just makes it look like you realized that you admitted something you shouldn't have.) Malou created the article Marc Anthony Richardson here   and has been the only substantial contributor to the article. Malou claims to be the subject of the article here  and here . Malou also claims instead to be an associate of  Richardson who gave Richardson access to his account and asked him to post a help request . And now you claim  to be just an acquaintance of the author, one who happened to read his book, liked it, and so decided to write an article about him. Meters (talk) 05:02, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Let me be clearer, because I'm new at this (this is my first contribution, because I love wiki) 1.) I am Malaou, the author of the article, and I sometimes use computers in an university library (I stated this), so I don't feel comfortable logging in (I'm on one now) 2.) I am just a non-paid acquaintance of Mr, Richardson, and I had him write while I was on the computer, stating that he was the subject of the article (thinking that if you needed verification, he could help you with it; this was purely in good intention; I thought it was harmless, albeit, not thorough on my part: I should've read the COI section); I admit, in this written form, I didn't make our distinction clear and I'm sorry for that; I can see how that may look to you, how that is confusing and misleading. 3.)I KNOW that you can still see deleted passages: I'm not trying to hide from you, just being brief (you pretty much already KNOW everything I deleted). Our communication has broken down--but please keep in mind that I'm just trying to HELP. I think this author needs to be on wiki, the book won an American Book Award and is great, and I'm just trying to help "clean" the article up (if it needs cleaning up). But your good faith is depleted, understandably, so I'm stepping away. Blessings to you, and I hope the issue can be resolved soon.  Because it is resolvable. (Malaou)96.61.0.138 (talk) 15:37, 16 December 2017 (UTC)