User talk:CFitzp

Colleen Fitzpatrick (forensic genealogist)
Please do not post your own résumé on Wikipedia. It is considered a conflict of interest and will be speedily deleted. Wikipedia is not a free webspace provider. There are many free web hosting services you can use instead. Please contribute constructively to Wikipedia in the future. Thanks, and welcome to Wikipedia.

I did not post this on Wikipedia, although I updated it to be more accurate. I am the founder of modern forensic genealogy, and am well known in the forensic sciences through the high profile and unusual cases I have worked on. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CFitzp (talk • contribs) 03:38, 30 June 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Benjaman_kyle_clean_shaven.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Benjaman_kyle_clean_shaven.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) 13:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Benjaman_kyle_clean_shaven_dressed_up.JPG
Thanks for uploading File:Benjaman_kyle_clean_shaven_dressed_up.JPG. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) 13:24, 2 July 2009 (UTC)

I just checked the copyright statements for the images on the Benjaman Kyle page, and it looks like they are all right. Could you help me figure out the correct statement to apply and how to apply it? I have been working on it for a couple of hours.

File permission problem with File:Benjaman Kyle.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Benjaman Kyle.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at Image copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Image copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Hekerui (talk) 12:39, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification
Hi. In Benjaman Kyle, you recently added a link to the disambiguation page Colleen Fitzpatrick (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:37, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Benjaman Kyle
Hello, CFitzp. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Benjaman Kyle, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. 71.139.143.36 (talk) 15:46, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:03, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
Hi, You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 14:04, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Colleen M. Fitzpatrick
I notice that somebody has added a COI tag to the top of the Colleen M. Fitzpatrick article, which you edited recently.

I am not a specialist in the "conflict of interest" (WP:COI) policy, but I do know that WP in general tends to be quite cautious about subjects editing articles either about themselves or on subjects closely related to themselves. Equally, I am not a specialist in the area of "biographies of living persons" (WP:BLP), but I do know that WP in general aspires to "first do no harm", in particular in regard to questionably relevant material being blown out of proportion.

As it would be good to get the COI tag removed from the article, and to solve any underlying issues, I hope you will not mind that I have asked for input on the article at the relevant noticeboard (WP:COIN), where the specialists in these sorts of questions tend to hang out, in order that the situation can be clarified and I hope speedily resolved. I hope this is acceptable. Jheald (talk) 22:40, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Discussion also notified at WT:WikiProject Human Genetic History, in section "Forensic Genealogy". Jheald (talk) 23:11, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Conflict of interest in Wikipedia
Hi Colleen. I work on conflict of interest issues here in Wikipedia. Based on your your edits to date you have edited quite a bit with a conflict of interest here in Wikipedia. I have worked over the article on you, but don't feel like digging into the Benjamin Kyle article so I will leave that to others. I'm giving you notice of our Conflict of Interest guideline and Terms of Use, and will have some comments and requests for you below.

Hello, CFitzp. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
 * instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
 * exercise great caution so that you do not violate 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).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you.

Comments and requests
Wikipedia is a widely-used reference work and managing conflict of interest is essential for ensuring the integrity of Wikipedia and retaining the public's trust in it. As in academia, COI is managed here in two steps - disclosure and a form of peer review. Please note that there is no bar to being part of the Wikipedia community if you want to be involved in articles where you have a conflict of interest; there are just some things we ask you to do.

Disclosure is the most important, and first, step. You have taken care of that already

The second is what I call "peer review". This piece may seem a bit strange to you at first, but if you think about it, it will make sense. In Wikipedia, editors can immediately publish their work, with no intervening publisher or standard peer review -- you can just create an article, click save, and viola there is a new article, and you can go into any article, make changes, click save, and done. No intermediary - no publisher, no "editors" as that term is used in the real world.

What we ask editors to do who have a COI and want to work on articles where their COI is relevant, is a) if you want to create an article relevant to a COI you have, create the article as a draft, disclose your COI on the Talk page using the appropriate template, and then submit the draft article through the WP:AFC process so it can be reviewed before it publishes; and  b) And if you want to change content in any existing article on a topic where you have a COI, we ask you to propose content on the Talk page for others to review and implement before it goes live, instead of doing it directly yourself. You can make the edit request easily - and provide notice to the community of your request -  by using the "edit request" function as described in the conflict of interest guideline. I made that easy for you by adding a section to the beige box at the top of the Talk page at Talk:Colleen M. Fitzpatrick - there is a link at "click here" in that section --  if you click that, the Wikipedia software will automatically format a section in which you can make your request.

By following those "peer review" processes, editors with a COI can contribute where they have a COI, and the integrity of WP can be protected. We get some great contributions that way, when conflicted editors take the time to understand what kinds of proposals are OK under the content policies. (which I will say more about, if you want).

I hope that makes sense to you.

I want to add here that per the WP:COI guideline, if you want to directly update simple, uncontroversial facts (for example, correcting the facts about where the company has offices) you can do that directly in the article, without making an edit request on the Talk page. Just be sure to always cite a reliable source for the information you change, and make sure it is simple, factual, uncontroversial content.

Will you please agree to follow the peer review processes going forward, when you want to work on the article about you, or any article where your COI is relevant? Do let me know, and if anything above doesn't make sense I would be happy to discuss. And if you want me to quickly go over the policies that govern article content here in Wikipedia, I can do that. Just let me know. Thanks! Jytdog (talk) 01:46, 22 March 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!
--UTRSBot (talk) 22:43, 26 December 2017 (UTC) --UTRSBot (talk) 19:52, 31 August 2018 (UTC)