User talk:Dr Greg Wood

Neutral point of view
Hi Greg. I edited your article on Mark Harper because it's a Wikipedia policy that articles are politically neutral ..however indignant some politicians or organisations may make us feel. I removed the reference to "trumpeting of ministerial vigour" for that reason. Your edits on Work Capability Assessment are of personal interest to me as I have a disabled young relative, & I look forward to studying them. Regards JRPG (talk) 22:00, 21 October 2014 (UTC)

Independent review into the impact on employment outcomes of drug or alcohol addiction, and obesity
Hi Greg. Thanks for your work on the Carol M. Black article. There has been quite a bit of material added that doesn't relate directly to her. I have moved some of this content across to a separate article- Independent review into the impact on employment outcomes of drug or alcohol addiction, and obesity. There were a few bits of text that I did not move across to the new article, in order to aim for a neutral point of view and encyclopaedic style. Drchriswilliams (talk) 12:06, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

OK Chris. I've put back one small section because it is a direct quote from Carol Black on work-related diseases that is very relevant to the 2015 issue. I thought the new title was a bit of a mouthful but don't know how to change the page heading. Is it worth calling it something like: '2015 review of welfare benefits, addictions and treatable conditions'? Dr Greg Wood (talk) 14:31, 2 August 2015 (UTC)


 * That would be a much more succinct title. I had gone with what I thought the official title was. There is some Wikipedia policy to help decisions, e.g. WP:RECOGNIZABLE. I think your suggestion complies with the various criteria. I have moved the page to 2015 review of welfare benefits, addictions and treatable conditions. The previous long title will now act as a redirect. Drchriswilliams (talk) 14:57, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

A page you started (Paul Litchfield) has been reviewed!
Thanks for creating Paul Litchfield, Dr Greg Wood!

Wikipedia editor Kudpung just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

"PLease address the issue of naked URLs and also remove and do not use any social or business networking sites (e.g. LinkedIn, etc.) as sources - they are not reliable. More info at WP:CITE and WP:RS."

To reply, leave a comment on Kudpung's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

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) 17:08, 24 November 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 8
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mark Harper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Islamic State. 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) 10:14, 8 December 2015 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 9
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Mark Harper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Audit Office. 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) 09:09, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Crabb
You are welcome to take this to a wider discussion, but meantime please do not restore tabloid sources on a living person. --John (talk) 15:02, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Employment and Support Allowance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frank Field (politician). 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, 7 June 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 11
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Anglo-Dutch Wars, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page States General. 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) 09:58, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Minor edits
I have noticed that you mark the majority of your edits as 'minor'. Please do this only if they can actually be considered as such as defined at WP:MINOR. Please see that page for more information. Thank you. Happy editing. Eagleash (talk) 11:42, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Editing Articles relating to the Work Capability Assessment
Hello,

I have noticed you have removed the POV tag. I have looked at your past edits on the page and it is very clear that you seem to use Wikipedia promote your personal point of view about the Work Capability Assessment. Wikipedia is not intended for this purpose. Please review WP:NOTSOAPBOX,WP:ADVOCACY and WP:SPA. CircleGirl (talk) 07:26, 21 December 2018 (UTC)

The tag refers to comments on the article's Talk page, but you had made none - editors should explain their edits. I disagree with your POV about my POV...we've all got one. PS Who are you?

Greg

December 2018
Hello, Dr Greg Wood. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Work Capability Assessment, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. 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 conflict of interest 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 which forms all or part of work 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. I've placed this template message here because of the similarity of your username to a real-world person who had been directly involved in the subject and whose criticisms were publicly reported. If you're not that same person, you might consider changing your username - but in that case you can feel free to remove this template. Thanks. JohnInDC (talk) 14:12, 21 December 2018 (UTC)


 * By the same token, we don't know who "Circle Girl" or "my name is not dave" are, do we? Both took it upon themselves to extensively re-edit the WCA article while adding nothing or virtually nothing in terms of new content - but removing or moving elsewhere huge chunks of other users' well-referenced criticisms. Links to policy-makers or politicians? Who knows. Dr Greg Wood (talk) 12:25, 26 December 2018 (UTC)
 * If you have a conflict of interest, you should disclose it. You can't escape your own obligation by casting dark and unsupported aspersions on others.  I think you should read up on some basic Wikipedia policies, like neutral point of view, conflict of interest, and no personal attacks.  I've added a welcome template below, which has links to those as well as other pages that will help you get acquainted with the encyclopedia.  Meantime since you have not denied it, I will assume that you are the same Greg Wood and have been personally involved in the matters on which the article bears.  Thanks.  JohnInDC (talk) 12:45, 26 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Ta. Wikipedia would be pointless if no one was allowed to write about things they actually knew something about! I think you've got COI wrong btw. I am interested in the WCA, sure, but where's the conflict?
 * PS Suggestions of bias were dealt with about a year ago, to everyone's satisfaction.PPS Still can't see why a real name and childish pseudonyms are broadly comparable. Happy New Year! Dr Greg Wood (talk) 11:55, 27 December 2018 (UTC)
 * This is where a little reading might help you. At Wikipedia, the point is not to write what we personally know but rather to write what reliable sources know about and report, in a way that is informative, properly sourced, and neutrally stated.  Indeed "personal knowledge" can sometimes get in the way of being a solid and constructive Wikipedia editor.  Truth, not verifiability is a nice short essay with some convenient links that will help you with this notion.  Food for thought.  Thanks.  JohnInDC (talk) 16:39, 27 December 2018 (UTC)

Here's where the conflict of interest is: In August 2014, you added this edit. In the section, you write about a doctor who resigned from Atos after being asked to change a report. You never mentioned anywhere that the doctor in question is you, even though your name is mentioned very prominantly in both of the sources in the section: both of the sources are inteviews with you. You've edited this section on numerous occasions, including after it was moved to the Criticism of the Work Capability Assessment article. You've been editing Wikipedia since 2014. Almost all your edits have been connected to the WCA but in that time, you've never disclosed that you had any personal connection with Atos and the WCA or that you were writing about yourself.

You also have to consider that you resigned from Atos under quite unhappy circumstances. You're not just writing about a controversial government policy; you're writing about your former employer. You may be personally motivated to write about Atos- and by extention the DWP- as negatively as possible.

You can still edit Wikipedia if you have a conflict of interest, but you need to disclose that you have a personal link to the topic. You definately shouldn't edit pages or sections about you personally (i.e. about you blowing the whistle on Atos), but you can ask others to edit for you. CircleGirl (talk) 03:29, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

I used my full name! What is your name, CircleGirl? Dr Greg Wood (talk) 07:52, 28 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Good morning Dr. Wood. Usernames are permitted to be anonymous here and the WP:UN gives warning about using one's own real name: "It can be your real name, if you so choose, but you should be aware of the risks involved in editing under your real name." By the same token Wikipedia allows IP edits. ANONYMOUS allows for pseudonyms to be used. Before making No personal attacks may I suggest you read the policies on this site, and remember to "comment on the content, not on the contributor." Thank you. Jake Symons:   (Talk)   (Contributions)   (User Space)  09:36, 28 December 2018 (UTC)

A belated welcome!


Here's wishing you a belated welcome to Wikipedia, Dr Greg Wood. I see that you've already been around a while and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help editors get the most out of Wikipedia:
 * Introduction
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * How to write a great article
 * Editor's index to Wikipedia

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes ( ~ ); that should automatically produce your username and the date after your post.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page, consult Questions, or place help me on your talk page and ask your question there.

Again, welcome! JohnInDC (talk) 13:23, 26 December 2018 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
There is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. CircleGirl (talk) 15:25, 29 December 2018 (UTC)

No need to thank me - just doing my bit! Dr Greg Wood (talk) 23:03, 29 December 2018 (UTC)