User talk:G.W. Schulz

Writing about exonerees
I'm a former journalist who now documents criminal convicts who were exonerated from their crimes in Oklahoma after serving prison sentences. I do this work on behalf of attorneys who represent these exonerees (specifically Oklahoma attorney Joseph Norwood). G.W. Schulz (talk) 04:57, 19 December 2023 (UTC)

January 2024
Hello, I'm Philipnelson99. I wanted to let you know that I reverted one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Draft:Glynn Ray Simmons—because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Teahouse or the Help desk. Thanks. Philipnelson99 (talk) 04:12, 9 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello G.W. Schulz. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:G.W. Schulz. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. What is your connection with law firms associated with the people you have edited about? Magnolia677 (talk) 07:36, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I am a former journalist who now writes for Oklahoma attorney Joseph Norwood. He specializes in wrongful convictions, general criminal defense, personal injury, family, and business. I couldn't figure out how to make the necessary COI disclosures, but I've done so now with your help. Thank you.
 * -George Schulz G.W. Schulz (talk) 18:51, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * The first edit you made when you opened your account last December, was to declare a conflict of interests, which means you were aware of Wikipedia's policy. You then went on to make several edits promoting your employer.  Please note that paid editing is not permitted on Wikipedia. Thank you. Magnolia677 (talk) 19:02, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hey there. Yes, it is correct that I had by then figured out how to disclose COIs on a new page I created. But I had not yet figured out how to do it for existing pages I was editing. Thanks to your email, I've made the necessary changes. The content itself is neutrally written, thoroughly sourced, and in the public interest. We saw that the story of Glynn Ray Simmons, the longest-serving wrongfully convicted man in recorded U.S. history, had not been told well on Wikipedia. We were seeking to remedy that with accurate information. I was under the impression that editing for compensation was allowable as long as any potential conflicts of interest are disclosed. If you still see me as odious, that's unfortunate. I don't have ill intentions. As you can no-doubt see from my profile, I'm new to Wikipedia. Thanks. G.W. Schulz (talk) 20:26, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * I have blocked you indefinitely, because you are still editing articles where you have a conflict of interest. PhilKnight (talk) 18:16, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My apologies. I'm new. I interpreted Wikipedia's policy to mean it was okay to contribute as long as any conflicts of interest were disclosed. I wasn't trying to be deceitful in any way. I'm seeking to add noteworthy content in a neutral tone and with full citations. I see now that it's better to use the talk page perhaps. G.W. Schulz (talk) 05:18, 20 January 2024 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Draft:Glynn Ray Simmons


A tag has been placed on Draft:Glynn Ray Simmons requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done for the following reason:

"Duplicate of Glynn Simmons"

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, pages that meet certain criteria may be deleted at any time.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the, or if you have already done so, you can place a request here. Magnolia677 (talk) 07:42, 16 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey there. Thank you for the reply. You asked that I describe how my "edits merited a block." Can you elaborate? Do you mean how my edits merit an unblock? And do I add my response here? The Wikipedia edits I've made so far, I believe, are very constructive. I had already read PAID and COI. As I state below, I have not seen where Wikipedia expressly prohibited contributing to a page when a conflict of interest existed. I interpreted PAID and COI to say it was allowed but required disclosure. That's what I thought as a new user. I would welcome the opportunity to instead contribute to non-COI pages and maybe offer suggestions on some talk pages.


 * Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. It is not the place to document the exhonerated, as noble as that cause is. Probaly your employer's website would be best suited for that. Thanks.-- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:52, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Hey there. Thank you for the reply. What's noble and whether or not wrongful convictions belong on Wikipedia would seem to be an editorial opinion, rather than a justification for blocking someone. People will always disagree about what belongs on Wikipedia. I thought my block was occurring because of my fully disclosed conflicts of interest. As I state below, I still have not seen anything from Wikipedia that absolutely forbids contributing where a conflict of interest exists. As an alternative, I would love the opportunity to contribute to non-COI pages and maybe contribute to select talk pages in the future.


 * Mr. Schulz, I am not an administrator, but have followed your edits. Regarding summarizing what reliable sources say, you respond above, "That is my intent as well, and that is what all of my content so far has sought to do."  You have made 13 total edits to Wikipedia, and every one of them was to promote your employer, including this unsourced edit where you added your boss to the alumni list of his college.  And here on a blog for your employer you write, "When the time comes that you need us, contact Norwood.Law for a free consultation". It certainly appears as if the only reason you opened a Wikipedia account was to promote your employer. Magnolia677 (talk) 18:57, 24 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hello there. Thank you for your response. I'm learning that on Wikipedia, it doesn't seem to make much difference if you're an administrator or not. If you have enough free time on your hands to participate in these sorts of things as a self-appointed police enforcer, there's much I can do about it.
 * Conflicts of interest are not inherently negative. Still no one has shown me where Wikipedia expressly prohibited contributing to pages where a conflict of interest existed. The people following my contributions seem to be experiencing confirmation bias and are selectively interpreting my actions to be evidence of efforts to undermine the public interest. You were careful to point to one missed attribution, for example. Wikipedia is crawling with missed attributions. You failed to mention that 99% of my contributions were thoroughly attributed, because that didn't comply with your perception of me as corrupt.
 * I didn't evade the attribution to be sneaky. It was an accident. But that's being overlooked to support the hypothesis that I'm a villain. (A single, missing citation could easily be added to the University of Tulsa College of Law page.) From what I can tell, you gravitated toward me in the first place, because I properly disclosed a conflict of interest.
 * The fact that I'm using my real name on Wikipedia also made it very easy for you to search for me online. (You, on the other hand, use an anonymous screen name.) So forgive me if my lack of experience wasn't obvious as I was contributing to the site for the first time. As I stated above, I'm still new to this and welcome the opportunity to prove myself by posting to non-COI pages and then perhaps propose content for certain subjects where I have a considerable amount of useful knowledge. G.W. Schulz (talk) 05:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Please see WP:PROMOTION, a policy on Wikipedia. Magnolia677 (talk) 16:12, 25 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Okay, thank you for your response on this. As I said, I'd welcome the opportunity to contribute to non-COI pages and then in the future maybe make suggestions on the talk pages of certain subjects where I have a disclosed conflict of interest. As for blocking and rule-following, I seem to still be in compliance with the PAID and COI pages, but I'm still being blocked. The promotion page you sent makes sense, but I did not urge anyone to pay for the services of a specific attorney in my attempted contribution. I focused on the noteworthy information. I mention attorney Joe Norwood very little. I could strip any mention of hi out if that would please the administrators. I'm not trying to cheat the system. G.W. Schulz (talk) 19:42, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not reviewing this(for fairness). It is true that COI contributions are not prohibited, but it must be done in the right way, according to WP:COI. But that is not a license to just dive right in and directly contribute. Now that you are blocked that bridge is burned and to get unblocked you will need to first rebuild that bridge by editing in other areas to demonstrate that you understand relevant policies and can set aside personal interest in your contributions. Please tell specifically what topics you want to edit about in the meantime. 331dot (talk) 13:21, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey there. Have you reviewed any of the content I attempted to post? I complied with all of the rules that I'm aware of. I did everything the link you sent called me to do. Still no one can show me explicitly how I broke Wikipedia's rules in the first place. You folks may not like Wikipedia's rules, but these are their rules I'm abiding by. They do not expressly ban editing with a conflict of interest. I fully disclosed my conflicts. But since you folks are going to do whatever you want anyway, here's what I would edit: homeland security, Coast Guard, Tulsa, and "The Undoing Project." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8804:6701:B500:60DD:C43C:9FEF:839B (talk) 18:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Concern regarding Draft:Glynn Ray Simmons
Hello, G.W. Schulz. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that Draft:Glynn Ray Simmons, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please edit it again&#32;or request that it be moved to your userspace.

If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.

Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot (talk) 18:10, 1 July 2024 (UTC)