User talk:Overwatch4020

Conflict of interest on Scott Driscoll
Hello, Overwatch4020. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Scott Driscoll, 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. sixty nine  • whaddya want? •  06:34, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

I have no conflict of interest on this subject. Much was clearly previously written with a huge degree of negative conflicted interest and much was factually distorted and/or incorrect. I have followed the matters related to this subject and researched it extensively. Your "conflict" allegation is completely unfounded and I will certainly continue to see this subject is written about here factually. Overwatch4020 (talk) 06:38, 15 January 2020 (UTC)
 * Your only edit history is on this article, while your edits so far have consisted of removing reliably sourced material because you personally think it's malicious, and replacing it with your own reworded (and unsourced) content. That certainly qualifies as conflict of interest. sixty nine   • whaddya want? •  06:46, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

I'm not a Wikipedia addict. I have no general obsession with it given my observations of it have been that is so entirely unreliable and used to be malicious, defame and generally give ignorant faceless operators a sense of power to taint.

But as I said, I have a very strong and well researched knowledge of this subject and will have the emotive dribble corrected.

Am I to take it you intend to assume you have a final judgement over this subject you seek to claim to be an authority on? And as such arrogantly delete factual corrections as a power trip?

If so I'm happy to dedicate a lot of time to reviewing any and all of your "contributions" on here in the same light.

Alternatively, I ask you immediately return my reviews on this subject as they were. I am happy to and intended to include many linked sources to my changes. But you injected yourself in the middle of it. Overwatch4020 (talk) 06:55, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

January 2020
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 Scott Driscoll, you may be blocked from editing. Thank you.  N0nsensical.system(err0r?)(.log) 09:35, 15 January 2020 (UTC)