User talk:KevinJRogers

Flagging entries
talk:Peaceray very kindly sent me a welcome message with some great information, but I have no idea how to respond. I hope this is the proper method! One issue I have is how to flag an entry as containing inaccurate information. I corrected an entry last night and someone undid all the edits and put the inaccurate information back in. I went back in and undid some of the undids, but I'd like to be able to flag it if they mess it up again. Thanks! KevinJRogers (talk) 16:32, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * You can put to your message, or you put a message on User talk:Peaceray. You can also leave a message on the user talk page of the person who is revert your reverts. --I dream of horses If you reply here, please ping me by adding  to your message. (talk to me) (contributions) @  18:02, 5 June 2015 (UTC)


 * Or you can discuss the issue on the article's talk page. In general, you should back up your statements with reliable third-party sources. When Rjensen reverted you here, for example, the given source was a dead link. And to be blunt, this edit turned an encyclopedia article into a political pamphlet, giving a platform for the party's political statements without third-party sources providing context or analysis. That is not appropriate, and it was rightly reverted. Huon (talk) 18:15, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
 * Google reports there is a person named "Kevin J Rogers" who is a senior official of this Modern Whig party. Editor KevinJRogers therefore needs to clarify his status-- is he a party official?  Rjensen (talk) 18:38, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes, I'm a non-compensated officer of the MWP (we're all volunteers who do something else for a living -- in my case I'm a business writer and journalist). I'm the Director of Policy Research and national vice-chair of the party. I attempted to edit the page because it misrepresented the current Modern Whig Party platform -- both in the intro and in the "platform" section of the entry. The use of the phrase "States' Rights" was particularly troublesome. If Rjensen or another editor wishes to correct it that's fine by me; the link to the website is good and all the necessary information is there, and I won't touch the entry at all. KevinJRogers (talk) 18:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and in the cited edit I'll grant the first line was unacceptable, but the second line is true: that is both the party's official and unofficial mottoes. KevinJRogers (talk) 19:10, 5 June 2015 (UTC)

Reference errors on 5 June
Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:A930913/RBpreload&editintro=User:A930913/RBeditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:A930913&preloadtitle=ReferenceBot%20–%20&section=new report it to my operator]. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:29, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
 * On the Modern Whig Party page, [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=665584847 your edit] caused a broken reference name (help) . ([ Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:ReferenceBot/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F665584847%7CModern Whig Party%5D%5D Ask for help])

Modern Whig Party
There are comments related to a post you made and you have been mentioned at Talk:Modern Whig Party --  Otr500 (talk) 15:01, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, KevinJRogers. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Modern Whig Party, 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 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. Thank you. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 20:47, 10 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi I dream of horses! To be clear, I haven't touched the Modern Whig Party page since June 2015, when I was made aware of the COI policy. At the time I thought it was alright to correct some factual errors, but since then I've only asked for help if something needed revision. And I honestly don't even know if there's a Modern Whig Institute page yet.
 * While we're on the subject, this line is somewhat inaccurate: "Modern Whigs retained their policy, advocacy and civics programs and reformed as the Modern Whig Institute." We didn't "re-form" -- legally, the Institute is an entirely new entity, independently incorporated in a different state after the MWP's corporation was dissolved and the Alliance Party was incorporated. The MWP membership and party officers had already been absorbed into the Alliance.
 * Our programs and initiatives are all new. The policies we advocate are familiar and look a lot like the MWP platform because they correspond to the Modern Whig worldview and philosophy. They'd look familiar no matter what name we used for the Institute.
 * The membership of the Institute is all new as well. There are many, many people who call themselves Modern Whigs -- or just Whigs -- and are not Institute members. Many of our members never had anything to do with the Modern Whig Party. There's no monolithic bloc of people called the Modern Whigs who got together as one thing and then got together as another.
 * I'm not sure there's a way to edit that line to make it accurate. All I can offer is this: the Modern Whig Institute was created to carry on the Whig movement outside the realm of electoral politics. If necessary, it's fine by me to point out the Institute was founded by former MWP officials (it says so on our site). But we're barred by law from involvement with candidates for elective office or their parties, so it should be written in a way to make it clear there's no relationship between the Institute and the MWP (which doesn't exist any longer, anyway) or the Alliance Party. KevinJRogers (talk) 21:25, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Oh, I should also point out I ceased to be an officer of the MWP in May 2016. KevinJRogers (talk) 21:29, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Sorry, forgot to ping you -- I haven't done much as an editor here so I'm a little unfamiliar with the messaging. KevinJRogers (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * @KevinJRogers Just link my userpage by doing User:I dream of horses. I dream of horses (Contribs) (Talk) 23:35, 10 April 2022 (UTC)
 * Got it, thank you @I dream of horses. I've been planning on getting involved more with Wikipedia so I appreciate the tip. (And I promise to continue to follow the rules and lay off the Whig stuff. LOL) KevinJRogers (talk) 00:07, 11 April 2022 (UTC)