User talk:Jeff Walker savoy

February 2016
First, let me apologize for not fully understanding the policy. I have used multiple names as simply, I don't use cookies and I don't remember the alias; and I often clean out my history/cached for security and privacy reasons. For avoidance of doubt (identity theft issues). I would like to have my account re-instated. I apologize in advance of any concern this may have caused and will notate the name using forward.

Thank you for your response. Understand the plausibility, and why you would ask. (Make sense).

However, to clarify, reason why I was able to find the email is that I screenshotted the history. After scrolling through (the record history in a captured screenshot), I looked @ several alias that could have been one I used. Recognized this alias. There were several alias's I tried, that clearly wasn't me. But this one worked; hence the association and once logged in could see the trail (dots connected). That said, as an adminastrator, you have records of my contributions to editing. You can notate I am not doing different aliases for different contributions. It's only for this one. As an adminstrator, you have every right and authority to make a decision. All I can say is the truth and it is truly I don't keep my cookies (I often erase) and using different alias is as I don't stay logged in....Hope this clarifies further for a reversal in decision. (if not for decision for reversal) but for clarification and will accept your decision.

Thank you for the time and consideration.

Thank you again for the clarity that first, by unblocking I would have to use the correct alias. Again, since I do not store my information/erase my cookies often, I will use the alias the administrator provided (as I did not know). Also kindly note by additional clarification, I outlined prior I only made contributions to this page (so no new information that I did not forthright state openly). Why I do not contribute to Other wikipedia pages, I know that I do not enough to contribute accurately :)

That said, specific to this page, it is only because I ran across some information on this individual that (as a huge fan of wikipedia) thought it be the source of content not widely shared and known only amongst a small group. It is not by any means to promote (as there is a lot already out there in the public domain on this person) rather as a place I thought valuable content for the Wikipedia community. For Again, appreciate the counsel. Through this process I have learned a lot and appreciate both administrators taking the time to educate me on the process and approach.
 * Question If you were unblocked, what kind of edits would you be making? (I assume that you realize that the "George Marrone" article has been appropriately salted as a result of your efforts). OhNo itsJamie Talk 22:46, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

First, thank you for the reference link to salted. After reading the definition, goodness I feel bad at due to my lack of experience/protocol, this page has been blocked/restricted for public editing. As there have been many editors, it's unfortunate that my lack of understanding has resulted in this for others (in addition to myself). With that in mind, to then answer your question...Knowing this as what I would be editing? First, I would check the rules of engagement and how to properly edit/insert content (e.g. proper use of citing sourcing, use of external and internal links (avoid over linking). List only contents that is more about the history and facts (and less that may appear/and not by intention promotional). Citing these links as frame of references of what type of content and how it should be shared out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Editing_policy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Policies_and_guidelines#.C2.ADContent

Hope that clarifies.
 * That's a description of how you would edit, not what you would edit. OhNo itsJamie  Talk 14:23, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Got it. using those references, as to what I would edit: (Looking at this Wiki Page, sets a good example): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Burke_(chef)

1) I would first look at the structure of the content (Condensing and stream line). Re-format to the basic historical facts: birthdate, education, places he has work @ and for whom 2) Any contributions he has made (e.g. awards, books authored etc) 3) Those who have worked for him (publicly cited they worked for him) 4) Any superflous external links (would be removed). Any links that reference other associations that have other Wiki Pages will be 'intralinked;

Hope that helps clarify and thanks again Jeff Walker savoy (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2016 (UTC)

Got it. using those references, as to what I would edit: (Looking at this Wiki Page, sets a good example): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Burke_(chef)

1) I would first look at the structure of the content (Condensing and stream line). Re-format to the basic historical facts: birthdate, education, places he has work @ and for whom 2) Any contributions he has made (e.g. awards, books authored etc) 3) Those who have worked for him (publicly cited they worked for him) 4) Any superflous external links (would be removed). Any links that reference other associations that have other Wiki Pages will be 'intralinked;

To ohnoitsjamie and MaxSem.

I am so sorry, but I don't understand and truly need guidance if there is a better way to describe (Not avoiding).

The question posed is What I would be editing? I believed below outlines the specifics of what I would be editing with a bit of additional context (put in brackets against the original statements) to further elucidate.

1) I would first look at the structure of the content (Condensing and stream line). Re-format to the basic historical facts: birthdate, education, places he has work @ and for whom (REASON For This as comparing the old content, I do believe it doesn't fall in the correct formatting order if I used a one structured from another chef)

2) Any contributions he has made (e.g. awards, books authored etc) (Ensure that any contributions made awards received, books authored are properly listed with cited references accordingly. I do believe he is the only Chef too have received 2 four stars in the bay area of which there is a public link from the critic that has expressed, in addition to citing the book he authored)

3) Those who have worked for him (publicly cited they worked for him) (Reference those who have referenced him using media links that attributes to the working relationship vs just stating the relationship without web trail to connect)

4) Any superflous external links (would be removed). Any links that reference other associations that have other Wiki Pages will be 'intralinked; (There were a lot of dead links int the old one and as such, those would be removed. Also, there is policy that too many external that link to outside resources is outside the policy). Therefore, I would avoid using those external links and when linking is necessary to cite the proper source, first use wiki pages)

Again, not avoiding and apologize if this comes across that way. Hope the above makes it clear What I intend to edit (nothing more than above mentioned) and using guidelines in adherence to what I recall against the original one that was deleted (that did not fall into policy).

Kindly let me know what further I can do to make it more transparent on my intent and my intended actions (what I intend to edit).

Thank you in advance.

Reason to unblock:

Reason here """"Please know that I am neither evasive nor I am unable to be collaborate; using a higher level of skills/acumen. I can absolutely appreciate the frustration as it falls into the 3rd category of assumption. I assumed that as administrators, everyone had access to the original tag/association of my ask for editing rights to the WikiPedia Page for Chef George Morrone. Therefore, to be clear, all the he/him refers directly to Chef George Morrone page and editing done to that page.""""

Reason here """There are other websites that have previously scraped the content from Chef George Morrone's Wikipedia Website page. See evidence here: http://everything.explained.today/George_Morrone/. However, since Chef George Morrone's Wikipedia Page has been both deleted and in combination, I have been blocked from editing, it's my goal to a create/restructure Chef George Morrone's Wiki page so that it should at first, be the defacto source of the most current, factual, reference page about Chef George Morrone vs other 3rd party reference sites. Further, by comparing the other website(s) (That had scraped Chef's George Morrone's Wiki page), the body clearly needs to be restructured/modified to the guidelines of setting up a bio-graphy page in accordance Wikipedia's guidelines. Originally when the page was set up, it continually to be edited outside the standard. This reason, I do absolutely own up that I have been at fault and have learned accordingly""".

Reason here """I ask only because I have been a long time fan and supporter of Wikipedia. I only want to contribute, and clearly learning along the way to do so accurately. If these above 3 reasons are not made clear, I do apologize and accept any final decisions as agree, your adminstrator's time can be focused on other pressing issues. I appreciate everyone's time and consideration"""