User talk:Officialwire

Ah, I didn't notice that you had edits in the now-deleted article on yourself, also. You've never made an edit which wasn't about you or your book, though, so my disappointment is still correct in spirit if not letter. You've never made an edit that was not about yourself, while Wikipedia editors all agree to avoid writing about themselves. Why bother creating www.crookedknight.com if you're just going to redirect it back to the amazon page, by the way? That's where people would have ended up if you hadn't spent the money on a domain name. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 12:26, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Given that I don't have any involvement with 3105.com; the registrant of the domain name that my company hosts, I don't know why that company uses it to redirect to Amazon.com. Perhaps they are merely trying to protect it from some other use. I don't think your attempt at advice is something many people would consider since there are a fair number of domain names registered that simply re-direct as crookedknightcom does. Also, you seem to be taking my request personally. Do I know you? Do you know anyone that has ever met me?

--Officialwire (talk) 15:21, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * It is odd that the link no longer points to the one in which someone writing for the website "Official Wire" identifies himself as the author of "Crooked Knight." I wonder how that happened?  I double-checked the link after adding it here, so the article itself has moved from the link since I found it.  Your username indicates that you are affiliated with "Official Wire," so I naturally assumed that you were the "Official Wire" writer who identifies himself as the author.  Now I see that you've identified yourself as "Greg Lloyd Smith," which makes you the publisher of the book, not the author.  That would make your claim that "I have not used this username or Wikipedia for self-promotion, ever" still a lie.  No, I don't know you; all I know about you is that you are trying to use Wikipedia for self-promotion, and also lying about doing so.  I've just looked up your name, and learned a number of interesting things, though.  It appears that you are, or were at one time, involved in a class action lawsuit against Wikipedia, which means that our policies don't allow you to edit Wikipedia- unless the lawsuit has concluded?  I wasn't able to find any record of its having gone to court yet, but I might have missed something.  -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 15:41, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

WOW, you really do have a problem. The "Official Wire" writer is not the author of Crooked Knight. I own OfficialWire. My name is Greg Smith. I am not David Alexander. Also, I didn't and my company didn't publish the book. Mayside, Inc., published the book (look on Amazon.com) and I don't have anything to do with Mayside, Inc. - Also, I was not involved in the so-called Class Action lawsuit (not sure if there was a lawsuit), but there WAS someone on Wikipedia who claimed that I was involved. You and your collegues seem quite willing to accept everything that appears on the Internet is TRUE, but there isn't a shread of proof or evidence apart from a Wikipedia User CLAIMING that I was involved and so your position is quite tenuous at best. Now, let's see, how could the link have been incorrect? Let's see. Could you have made a mistake? Surely not. You saw it was moved. Where is it? --Officialwire (talk) 16:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Right now, a google search still identifies that link as going to the article, "OfficialWire: City Firm Objects To Nigel Wray Story...Six Months Late," though clicking on the link no longer takes one to that text, as it did when I responded to your request this morning.  I think you moved it this morning, which seems a little petty and a bit pointless- it didn't really prove that much, other than that there's a connection between the book and OfficialWire, which is sort of obvious from your edits.  After all, this account isn't going to be unblocked, since it's in violation of the username policy.  FisherQueen (talk · contribs)

I just performed the search and don't get the results you claim. I think you have some personal grudge against me, which does not suprise me given the information available on you; i.e. who you're associated with. You would do better to try to adhere to those principals expounded by your Church instead of bearing false witness against others. On the matter of the alleged violation re: my username, I wonder if you're as active on the hundreds of thousands of other purported violtions as you are on this one. In the end, it doesn't matter to me because I just wanted to demonstrate and record the personal vendetta you have against me and you have satsified that purpose nicely. Again, best wishes to you. --Officialwire (talk) 17:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Cute. You are fully living up to your reputation, which, as you mentioned, is not sourced in mainstream media, so I had previously not assumed to be entirely true.  I believe the next step is for you to attack me in the pages of OfficialWire, which I look forward to.  I invite you to find an example of any account which was named for a web site or business which I unblocked, in order to support your claim that I am acting out of 'vendetta.'  I had never heard of you before I reviewed your request for unblock, and I still don't care enough to have a 'vendetta.'  I'd love to stay and chat, since you are mildly entertaining, but since, as far as I can tell, much of what you say isn't true, there's not really much point. Goodbye. -FisherQueen (talk · contribs) 17:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Again, I don't know what you're talking about. What reputation? Are you talking about the false statements of people who like to promote their untrue accusations on Wikipedia? Please let know of any person who I have "attacked" on OfficialWire. Please show me the link or any link to the page of any article attacking any person. I suspect, like the link you claimed was self-promoting those links will have moved to a location you cannot find. In fact, everything I have written is quite true and it's your statements that have been shown to be untrue here on this page. --Officialwire (talk) 17:18, 7 March 2010 (UTC)