User talk:Greatwrite

January 2018
Hello. Some of your recent genre changes, such as the one you made to Michael DeLorenzo, have conflicted with our neutral point of view and verifiability policies. While we invite all users to contribute constructively to Wikipedia, we urge all editors to provide reliable sources for edits made. When others disagree, we recommend you seek consensus for certain edits by discussing the matter on the article's talk page. Thank you. Flyer22 Reborn (talk) 18:05, 6 January 2018 (UTC)

Conflict of interest policy
Hello, Greatwrite. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. Editing for the purpose of advertising or promotion is not permitted. 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 COI 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 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. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 17:27, 7 January 2018 (UTC)


 * There is no conflict of interest however some of these facts are well known in his career. I want to make sure all information provided is accurate too. It needs to be properly peer reviewed not thrown out because you’re not looking to see the sources. Anyone that know NY undercover knows what is being disputed by your notations discredits this individuals accomplishments GreatWrite


 * Thanks for clearing up my conflict of interest concerns.
 * As for being "thrown out", WP:BLP actually requires it be thrown out. I'm hoping it won't come to that, but we need to find a way to work together, and hope no one comes along in the meantime and starts removing unreferenced and poorly referenced information as required. --Ronz (talk) 19:38, 7 January 2018 (UTC)


 * sorry but I’ve cut negativity out of this conversation because no one even myself should discredited.but I do want to apologize to User Ronz for being a bit harsh and coming off rude. I’ve read User ronz comments and understand your trying to better the citations and references that more than one primary source. I’ve seen your input and I respect it. I apologize to Ronz if I came off too harsh. I too wanted to enhance this article as well to make sure it’s correctly reflected. In doing so I read over all the edits that’s been provided for this article back to the first entry. I’m a English major and I was an editor for my school newspaper in the past. There was a point when this article was poorly written, bad use of the English language in general with absolutely no proper references and citations.  It looks some point they did a better job providing content than anything provided previously but cut and pasted from a website. I am a fan and I want to read about the artist in the best of light.at first  I just didn’t understand why some of the facts known to the majority of the fans were being challenged but I understand the importance of having proper citation and will study the rules a bit more to do it better. GreatWrite

January 2018
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement. Please be particularly aware that Wikipedia's policy on edit warring states: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes; work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. --Ronz (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made.
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.


 * I believe you are conducting an edit war. Your review and edit of this article is questionable.your edits has to be challenged because you know nothing of the subject to be able to edit and find proper resources.  Greatwrite


 * Thank you for responding. If you look on the article's talk page, Talk:Michael DeLorenzo, I believe you'll see that I've been trying to find proper references to address the problems in the article. --Ronz (talk) 19:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

I’ve reviewed your work and I apologize for my previous challenge. I see you are trying to enhance the supported evidence. However, some of these activities that need citations are not easy to find and simply just known to those that just followed him through the years as fans. I guess finding a balance of not turning this site into a fan site Greatwrite

An extended welcome
Welcome to Wikipedia. I've added a welcome message to the top of this page that gives a great deal of information about Wikipedia. I hope you find it useful.

Additionally, I hope you don't mind if I share some of my thoughts on starting out as a new editor on Wikipedia: If I could get editors in your situation to follow just one piece of advice, it would be this: Learn Wikipedia by working only on non-contentious topics until you have a feel for the normal editing process and the policies that usually come up when editing casually. You'll find editing to be fun, easy, and rewarding. The rare disputes are resolved quickly and easily.

Working on biographical information about living persons is far more difficult. Wikipedia's Biographies of living persons policy requires strict adherence to multiple content policies, and applies to all information about living persons including talk pages.

If you have a relationship with the topics you want to edit, then you will need to review Wikipedia's Conflict of interest policy, which may require you to disclose your relationship and restrict your editing depending upon how you are affiliated with the subject matter.

Some topic areas within Wikipedia have special editing restrictions that apply to all editors. It's best to avoid these topics until you are extremely familiar with all relevant policies and guidelines.

I hope you find some useful information in all this, and welcome again. --Ronz (talk) 19:03, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Please respond
Hi Greatwrite. Could you please respond here so that I know you've read the above at least? --Ronz (talk) 19:24, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the responses. I've asked for help on the article at Biographies_of_living_persons/Noticeboard. --Ronz (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2018 (UTC)


 * Hi Ronz, once again very sorry. Your work is with good intent. I’ve also reached out to other fans outside of the Wikipedia editor community to see if they can lend their input into this issue.
 * Thank you. I've added a few comments on the article talk page that I hope will help. --Ronz (talk) 18:06, 8 January 2018 (UTC)