User talk:CarpeDiemPR

October 2009
If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant 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 conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Dear Mike,

I certainly understand your concern about bias and conflict of interest. That said, if you go through the edits I made, I think you will see that they were rather free of bias. I certainly did my very best to avoid it. My goal was simply to add more, relevant, up-to-date information about Anna Baltzer, and I tried only to add things which I could site. It's because of this that I am very disappointed that you undid every edit I made. I read your page, and various exchanges that you've had with other people, and you seem like a very reasonable person, so I ask this of you: would you be willing to go through the edits I made, one-by-one, and only delete the ones which you think show bias or are inappropriate? I think you will find that most of it is just factual information, with citations, that are certainly germane and worthy of being on the Wikipedia page.

As for the username thing, you're right. I don't know what I was thinking. Rather dumb of me. I'll change it.

I hope you'll consider looking over the changes, and I hope to hear back from you.

Thanks much, Mike,

Brent


 * Sorry, but no. Most of those edits involved adding inappropriate links, such as YouTube; and citations to non-notable or non-reliable sources. The text edits seemed calculated to provide a more favorable perspective on her work, and lead me to deduce(although you don't say so) that you are in fact engaged in public relations work here. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:27, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Please choose another username
Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please create a new account with a username that represents only you. If your username doesn't represent a group, organization or website, you may ask for a review of this username block by adding the text below this message. Thanks. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:11, 28 October 2009 (UTC)