User talk:David Foster at DFM

July 2017
Please do not add or change content, as you did at Chris Packham, without citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. ''I saw that you added a lot of new material, but did not cite any sources, you also deleted sourced material, next time please include citations to reliable sources and use an edit summary to explain your reason for such major changes, if you have any questions feel free to ask me. '' Tornado chaser (talk) 14:55, 7 July 2017 (UTC) This is the first Wikipedia page I have updated and it is my client's page. What you have just deleted is 2 days of work. I had just saved the page and removed all the References (saving them to an html file) and was about to go through all the text and add the references. And you deleted the content. The updates were urgent for my client and needed for tomorrow. Please would you urgently advise me where I can put back that content and add the references. He is a public figure and all that content verifiable. I'm appalled that you give no time to complete a page's content. I have been so careful. This is not straightforward and any help you can give in restoring my work would be greatly appreciated. Thank you David Foster at DFM (talk) 16:32, 7 July 2017 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, David Foster at DFM. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article Chris Packham, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:


 * avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
 * instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the request edit template);
 * when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the 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 which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Tornado chaser (talk) 23:14, 7 July 2017 (UTC)


 * I have been as factual and neutral as possible, giving citings and links. The information given is of general interest about this public figure. I sincerely hope that all edits are now all acceptable. Thank you for your comments. David Foster at DFM


 * I have made a request for a more experienced editor to review the neutrality of your edits, this doesn't mean anything is wrong with your edits, just that they should be checked. Tornado chaser (talk) 00:52, 8 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Hello David! I came across your edits and wanted to draw your attention to the information on disclosing a conflict of interest when editing in a paid capacity. Please make sure to declare your conflict of interest as is required by the Terms of Use and local policy. That being said I hope you enjoy your time at Wikipedia and continue to make productive edits :D Happy editing!--Cameron11598 (Talk) 00:59, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

ANI notice
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Tornado chaser (talk) 00:46, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Serious COI concern
This has me concerned: You have posted to day the following at User talk:Tornado chaser link:
 * "You have just deleted 2 days of work from our client's page. We are his agents and were updating his page as a matter of urgency and I was just about to do the citations/references. This is the first time I've ever done this and have been diligently working through each section and trying to do it correctly. I was trying to get the references edited and have saved them all as it had become a mess. I was just about to sort that section and you deleted my work. I'm distraught! This page was urgently needed for tomorrow. I can't believe all that work is lost. Can you undo the deletion? I hope I've posted to the right place because this is so complex. If not, apologies."
 * There is so much wrong and in violation of Wikipedia's policies that it is hard to know where to start. You have admitted to a serious conflict of interest. You have admitted to running a multiple user account on behalf of an organization in violation of WP:ISU. You seem to be in a hurry to post, yet there is no deadline in Wikipedia. As mentioned above, there is an open case at Administrators%27_noticeboard/Incidents. You would be well advised to visit there and comment. You would also be well advised to stop work on that article until you explain the conflict of interest. Paid-contributions are explained here: Paid-contribution disclosure and must be disclosed. You have not officially and properly disclosed, but went ahead and did it anyway, in total disregard of policies. Please visit the case in question (linked to before) and explain before you continue. -- Alexf(talk) 01:55, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I'm a Wikipedia administrator (as is Alexf) and a longtime writer here. I have read through the edits you have made to Chris Packham and to cut a long story short they make the article worse. Wikipedia is a global encyclopedia that can be read by anyone, and one of the most important policies is that articles must have a neutral point of view. In short, that means they should not present any bias or lop-sidedness, and present a fair comment that would be acceptable to those who do not share the subjects views or ideals (in the case of Chris Packham, this might be fracking supporters or fox hunters) or are not particularly interested in the subject. It may be important for you to mention everything he has done in his life, but for the casual layman reader, it isn't. The full detail is best put on a personal website instead.

You say you are anxious to have your changes in place for your client, presumably as you will not otherwise get paid. Let me ask you this; if you were called in to renovate a house, would you expect to get the work if you just turned up without some sort of certification such as the Chartered Institute of Building or Federation of Master Builders? If you were asked to rebuild and redecorate a bathroom, would you expect to get the job without a list of referrals and previous projects? So why would you expect to get a contract to write a Wikipedia article without a strong track record of content, such as having been the primary author of several featured articles? Indeed, you said "This is the first time I've ever done this".

Despite outwards appearances, writing a neutral and well-crafted article on Wikipedia, especially on a living person, is actually quite difficult and requires a good question of judgement and balance. This is impossible to do if you are close to the subject.

You may find these links helpful : An article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing and the Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont)  10:09, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your assistance and I have taken on board your comments. David Foster at DFM