User talk:Clhwarwick

Welcome!
Hello, Clhwarwick, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Roger Sainsbury (engineer), which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * Best practices for editors with close associations
 * Plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! —C.Fred (talk) 18:06, 8 June 2021 (UTC)


 * Dear C.Fred



Thank you so much for your help. As you say I am new to Wikipedia and didn't know about COIs. I am Roger Sainsbury's goddaughter, and he asked me to help because he is unhappy that the page that has been set up about him is not an accurate representation of the controversy over his resignation. I did not realise that it is not acceptable for me to make edits if I know the person concerned. I'd just like to confirm that I am not being paid for this, nor will I benefit from it in any way. My account is also used solely by me.

Would it be possible to archive the draft of the edits I made anyway? The perhaps they could be used as the basis for an agreed new page, if you would be willing to read such a draft.

I do think that, although the page that's now been reinstated cites objective sources, the interpretation of these may be biased. This resignation was obviously a complex and controversial issue, and the current text really only presents one side of it and of Roger's career. So for example it strongly implies that London City Airport was not profitable for Mowlem so Roger may have been asked to leave- I don't think there's any evidence for that view, so I do think it is justified to remove that assertion. But the tone of the rest of the piece seems deliberately negative, as if intended to portray Roger as some kind of eccentric intellectual who does not belong in engineering (for example the quotation about not being most people's idea of a contractor)

It may be that the edit I made goes too far the other way. But might it be possible to come to some kind of compromise? In other words, could a page resonably present two different sides of the debate? Could it cite both the sources in this page, and the ones that I used, so that the reader could make up their mind about this? Could the tone be, as I tried to be in my edits, impersonal and objective, rather than negative by implication, stopping well short of any kind of hagiography, of course?

Roger tells me that a friend of his tried to help with this, and was advised to start a conversation with the other editor, as part of the dispute resolution process. But he or she refused to engage with this, and so his friend gave up. This is when I offered to help, not realising that it might not be allowed becuase of my relationship with him. I also hope that the person that created this page has also declared any interests in this that they may have...

So any advice you could give me would be extremely helpful. Thanks in advance. Clhwarwick (talk) 09:08, 10 June 2021 (UTC)


 * There are two issues. First, you should not edit his article directly. What you may do is request edits via Talk:Roger Sainsbury (engineer).
 * Second, any changes you propose must be backed up by reliable sources, such as newspaper or journal articles about him. Ideally, the sources should be independent of him. —C.Fred (talk) 15:44, 10 June 2021 (UTC)