User talk:Hadropithecus

Welcome!

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type   on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Where to ask a question or ask me on. Again, welcome! ttonyb1 (talk) 17:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Your first article
 * Biographies of living persons
 * How to write a great article
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial

Learn more about page curation.

Redirect
Hi — I have replaced the article Threatened and Recently-extinct Vertebrates of the World with a redirect to the author's page. There isn't much point in writing an article about something that hasn't been published yet, because you're unlikely to find sufficient sources to establish notability. Case in point: the article was completely unreferenced, which in itself is a problem, and a reason for deletion. If and when the book one day comes out and becomes notable, by all means remove the redir and develop the article further. Best, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:08, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Hadropithecus. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Matthew Richardson (author), 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, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * 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 are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. ''Your edits seem to be mostly on articles to do with Matthew Richardson or his publications. Might there be a reason for that? Thanks,'' DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:09, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

May 2021
Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Matthew Richardson (author), without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. ''I can see from the edit history that this isn't the first time. Please do NOT remove tags without addressing the issues. Thank you. --'' DoubleGrazing (talk) 20:18, 2 May 2021 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to remove maintenance templates without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Matthew Richardson (author), you may be blocked from editing. DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:32, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you remove maintenance templates from Wikipedia articles without resolving the problem that the template refers to, as you did at Matthew Richardson (author). Ashley yoursmile!  15:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Please delete this page. I cannot resolve the problems related to it myself, and have no means to delete it myself.

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates, or other materials from Wikipedia without adequate explanation, as you did at Matthew Richardson (author), you may be blocked from editing. ''I have reverted your attempted blanking of this article, because I don't believe it complied with WP guidelines. --'' DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:58, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Your comments
Hi again — in your most recent edit notes on Matthew Richardson (author), you said "This page contains verifiable facts only. I don't know what else I can possibly do to address your issues." I'm assuming the "your issues" bit was aimed at me, since I'm the one who placed the maintenance tags? Therefore, in response: the article has a single source, cited only once, which is wholly inadequate for the size of the article, on any subject, let alone a WP:BLP. Moreover, the source doesn't even work, returning instead '404 - Not Found'; in other words, the article is unsupported by any sources whatsoever. Which raises the question (somewhat related to the COI query I made here yesterday), where is all this information coming from? Also, without sources, notability cannot be established, which is why the notability tag is there. Hence I would have thought it's obvious "what else [you] can do" — add sources to support the contents, establish notability, and go at least some way towards addressing the possible COI. Hope this helps, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)


 * Look, I don't know who or what the hell you are (a bot, perhaps?). I found a page about me and my work with a lot of information regarding colleagues, publishers, etc. I tried to update / correct it in the spirit of Wikipedia. Instead, I'm being told to defend my "notability" with some anonymous entity that appears to be holding my public reputation for ransom. Either get rid of your creepy, passive-aggressive messages, or delete this page altogether. I don't care which. If you fail to do either, my next step is to contact Wikipedia directly.


 * Firstly, I would ask you to remain civil, and address the issues. Secondly, it's not for me to delete this page, if by that you mean literally this page; this is your user page, not mine. However, I may move for deletion of the articles in question, if the sourcing isn't brought in line with Wikipedia guidelines, but even then I don't have any actual powers to delete anything. Thirdly, I don't know what you mean by "contact[ing] Wikipedia directly", but by all means do whatever you think is necessary; just be prepared to answer similar questions to what I have posed here.
 * As for your comments regarding having found articles about "me" and "my work", are you in fact saying that you are Matthew Richardson? If so, please make the necessary disclosures as instructed in the earlier COI message. Thank you, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 14:30, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

I am actually his father, and I believe that his work stands for itself.
 * Which is it? Sorry you say above that it is a page about you and your work, and now you say you're their father. Canterbury Tail talk 15:47, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

ANI discussion involving you
There is currently a discussion at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:28, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Please delete this page. I have no means to do so myself.

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. The thread is Likely COI editing. Thank you. — Alexis Jazz (talk or ping me) 15:39, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

This is now serious harassment. I demand that you either remove the page, or delete your comments.
 * Note, this is not harassment, this is standard Wikipedia processes. A page has been identified with a clear conflict of interest. It is incumbent on editors to investigate, determine if the article is notable and bring things into line with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Please stop attacking other editors. Canterbury Tail talk 15:48, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Do something. Delete the page, or don't, but stop the harassment.

Hounding See also: Wikipedia:Etiquette, Wikipedia:Tools § User edit counts and analysis, and Wikipedia:Disruptive editing § Campaign to drive away productive contributors "WP:STALK" formerly redirected here. For users who view user talk pages to provide answers or add inputs, see Wikipedia:Talk page stalker.

Hounding on Wikipedia (or "wikihounding") is the singling out of one or more editors, joining discussions on multiple pages or topics they may edit or multiple debates where they contribute, to repeatedly confront or inhibit their work. This is with an apparent aim of creating irritation, annoyance, or distress to the other editor. Hounding usually involves following the target from place to place on Wikipedia.

Many users track other users' edits, although usually for collegial or administrative purposes. This should always be done carefully, and with good cause, to avoid raising the suspicion that an editor's contributions are being followed to cause them distress, or out of revenge for a perceived slight. Correct use of an editor's history includes (but is not limited to) fixing unambiguous errors or violations of Wikipedia policy, or correcting related problems on multiple articles. In fact, such practices are recommended both for Recent changes patrol and WikiProject Spam. The contribution logs can be used in the dispute resolution process to gather evidence to be presented in mediation, incidents, and arbitration cases. Using dispute resolution can itself constitute hounding if it involves persistently making frivolous or meritless complaints about another editor.

The important component of hounding is disruption to another user's own enjoyment of editing, or disruption to the project generally, for no overridingly constructive reason. Even if the individual edits themselves are not disruptive per se, "following another user around", if done to cause distress, or if accompanied by tendentiousness, personal attacks, or other disruptive behavior, may become a very serious matter and could result in blocks and other editing restrictions.

Threats Threatening another person is considered harassment. This includes any real-world threats, such as threats of harm, and threats to disrupt a person's work on Wikipedia. Statements of intent to properly use normal Wikipedia processes, such as dispute resolution, are not threats. Legal threats are a special case of threat, with their own settled policy. Users who make legal threats will typically be blocked from editing indefinitely.


 * I just want to clear something up for you. No one is stalking you. No one is hounding you. Someone came across an article that raised some questions and they looked into it, which also included looking at the edits of the person that created it. That is standard. They are taking the regular and appropriate actions to determine if the page is indeed notable and if it is a subject to a conflict of interest. The later point is clearly true, but the notability is still to be determined. This isn't someone stalking you but is normal Wikipedia procedure according to process and guidelines. As mentioned when you edit Wikipedia, you do not own an article that you created and anyone can edit a page that anyone else has created. No one is doing any harassing here, just trying to make a determination on the article. It should also be noted, as a word of advice, that if you keep making "demand"s then people will stop listening to what you have to say and you will not get a chance to participate in the process. Canterbury Tail talk 16:18, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of The Royal Book of Lists for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article The Royal Book of Lists is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/The Royal Book of Lists until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:04, 3 May 2021 (UTC)

Nomination of Matthew Richardson (author) for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Matthew Richardson (author) is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Matthew Richardson (author) until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. --- Possibly (talk) 19:11, 3 May 2021 (UTC)