User talk:Kgbgloworm

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Kgbgloworm. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Robert Davis (British politician), 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. Thank you. Edwardx (talk) 18:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)


 * I have no relationship with Mr Davis. Mr research shows your entry is biased and incomplete. I am not being paid and have not worked for anyone connected with him or the references. I find your obstructions will put anyone off contributing to Wikipedia.


 * Everything is referenced - if you are questioning some of the input please be more specific rather than doing wholesale deletions.


 * Thank you for your response. I can see at least four whole paragraphs of your version that were without any reference. Your statement with regard to conflict of interest could be more forthcoming. Have you read our COI policy thoroughly? And how is the current version "biased"? Edwardx (talk) 01:26, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

I am not sure why you are still questioning the conflict of interest issue. I have never met the man or spoken to him or am I receiving a payment. I think your version is biased because it focuses primarily on the last few months of his career and the allegations regarding hospitality quoting. There is next to nothing about the other 35 years plus of his career. Your version is also out of date and wrong. For example you say "Westminster's legal director is investigating whether Davis has breached the code of conduct, and the independent barrister James Goudie QC is helping with the investigation" - this not correct, the investigation finished a long time ago! You have also selectively chosen the quotes from the report - you do not clarify the report said it "had not seen any evidence that happened". To be clear I had no intentions remove the allegations part of the entry even though I think it is biased. I have been adding more information to give a fuller picture of this long serving politician's career and you keep on removing everything without checking your own work. Who checks your unpaid work as a matter of interest?