User talk:PhilCult84

Happy Holidays text.png


PhilCult84, Have a great 2020 and thanks for your continued contributions to Wikipedia.

– 2020 is a leap year   – news article. – Background color is Classic Blue (#0F4C81), Pantone's 2020 Color of the year Send New Year cheer by adding     to user talk pages.

– RMT 17:51, 31 December 2019 (UTC)

March 2020
You have been blocked from editing for a period of 24 hours from from certain pages (Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard) for using a central Wikipedia noticeboard as a forum for disruptive outing attempts and/or conspiracy theories. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 17:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, the block was an overreaction to what I have incorrectly interpreted as outing of (an)other editor(s). I have undone my erroneous decision; feel free to remove these messages.

Please keep in mind that Wikipedia discussion pages are not a general forum for off-topic discussions, and that general complaints about the existence of checkusers on Wikipedia are unrelated to the disucssion about conflicts of interests at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard. Because your comments have disruptively derailed the discussion, I have collapsed them. The community-created guideline behind this decision can be found at WP:TPO. I had originally deleted the material entirely because I have incorrectly interpreted it to be an attempt at publishing undisclosed personal information about (an) Wikipedia editor(s). Instead, I now understand that your unfounded accusations are strange and off-topic, but not "outing". I should not have blocked you to prevent you from continuing something you never did in the first place.

When continuing to discuss at Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard, please keep your responses focused on the actual discussion topic. Persistent off-topic complaints about general procedures on Wikipedia, and comparing them to dystopian novels, is unhelpful and may lead to a block for disruptive editing, specifically refusing to "get the point", that will not be removed as erroneous. The English Wikipedia community is, from my point of view, pretty quick at implementing such blocks to prevent further disruption.

Please do not respond with more conspiracy theories and accept this message as a (possibly final) warning for behavior that was indeed disruptive and led to complaints by multiple editors.

Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:38, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Thank you User:ToBeFree, we will find a way to resolve the problem which indeed is not a big one under my opinion. My aim is to write a lot about the historical facts I have in my archives in wikipedia and that‘s it. Be well. --PH_C 20:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC) PhilCult84 (talk)


 * Hi, this really relieves me. I'm sorry for my initial heavy-handed approach to the situation, and for having completely misinterpreted your attitude. My reaction might have confirmed your views on Wikipedia in an ironical and sad way. Sorry again and all the best, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 20:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Good evening User:ToBeFree, thank you for your honest message. I appreciate the ethical values and have great respect for people who are truthful. I would like to ask you to speak to your colleagues in the United States so that we can get the unnecessary matter to a close as soon as possible. We have very serious problems in the world right now and I am currently committed to people who need my help. Thanks and all the best (By the way: please read this new article from a German newspaper. Interesting!) []

PhilCult84 (talk) --PH_C 21:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * Thank you for sharing the interesting article,, and for the friendly request. I'll try to mediate.
 * To get an overview of the situation, I'll need to know whether you have a connection to the users or articles mentioned in the noticeboard discussion. For example, if you work for an organization or company related to Rolf Lauter, or if you know him personally. In this case, the easiest way to deal with the situation is to edit your user page, adding a short sentence about this connection. Such a conflict of interest, if you have one, is not a general problem. The community only expects you to disclose such connections, if there are actually any. The relevant guideline on the English Wikipedia is "WP:Conflict of interest". It is stricter than the German Wikipedia's equivalent.
 * If you are connected to the topic of an article you'd like to edit, please avoid clicking "Edit" directly. Instead, please click "Talk" above the article, and "New section". You can then request changes, and add the "request edit" template above your message to request a quick review by other volunteers. This is usually done within 24 hours. The edit is then added to the article, or the reviewer explains if something needs to be changed. For example, the reviewer would ask you to rewrite the sentence if it is not neutral enough, or if it lacks a good reference.
 * If you have absolutely no connection to Rolf Lauter, don't know him personally, and if you have no connection to the other editors mentioned in the discussion, please also explicitly say so. I think all the colleagues are looking for is a "yes" or "no", and none of these two options would be problematic. We're here to help, but we currently lack the required information to do so. The only problem, to them, seems to have been the lack of a clear answer.
 * Thank you very much in advance!
 * Best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * PS: You are not required to disclose the exact type of connection, if you have one. A simple sentence like "I have a conflict of interest regarding the following topics: Rolf Lauter, ..." would be perfectly fine. You are also not required to disclose any connection to topics you do not edit about. For example, if your employer is Microsoft and you never edit Microsoft-related topics, you are not required to disclose your connection to Microsoft. Undisclosed conflicts of interest are only a problem if you actually edit about these topics.
 * Regarding privacy, the (perhaps unfortunate) situation is that all Wikipedias, even the German Wikipedia, are run by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization from San Francisco, California. Thus, the privacy laws are less restrictive than ours in Germany. This can be upsetting sometimes, but I think we all just need to deal with it. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 23:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)
 * PPS: Sorry, I have overlooked a possibility. If you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your edits – for example, if you are editing as part of your job – you need to explicitly disclose your employer, client, and affiliation on your user page. This is required by a separate, much stricter policy, WP:PAID. It is important on all Wikipedias, including the English and German Wikipedia. If it does not apply to your situation, please explicitly say that it doesn't. Thanks! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 00:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi User:ToBeFree, Thank you for your support as a “mentor”. No! I don't work for The Lauter, nor for the person Lauter, nor is there a conflict of interest with this topic! I had already denied this in my - unfortunately deleted - answer on the conflict side. In addition, there were and are no fees for my various text contributions on Wikipedia. Writing is my hobby. I got to know the group of scientists around Zissuu and I am very impressed by their research, their commitment and enthusiasm. As far as I can see and read, they have access to special archives which helps to include historical facts a lot. Even if we have met in the past to exchange ideas about Wikipedia rules and articles, we are currently not in contact. There is no conflict of interest here either. Your comments on data protection do not reassure me, because we know the scandals from Facebook and other companies that have passed on private data to unauthorized persons. Please take good care of the Corona Virus! PhilCult84 (talk) --PH_C 20:21, 17 March 2020 (UTC)
 * No worries, . Thank you very much for the clear answer, and – yes – I do now notice that you had denied this before. Sorry for having asked the same question twice.
 * I think this is now coming pretty close to an amicable conclusion. There is perhaps one step left: I'll need to provide the following points of advice.
 * Zissuu explains on her user page that she "has been doing research in the archives of the gallery and the Lauter family for the past two years, maintaining it and significantly expanding it." If I understand correctly, this did involve personal communication between her and the Lauter family. If I understand correctly, her research was only possible because the Lauter family allowed it, and because the Lauter family provided material for the research. Is this correct? In this case, she does have a conflict of interest, even if she does not believe to have one. It would furthermore be a case of prohibited original research to directly add the results of such research to Wikipedia articles.
 * If the above is correct, and if you have been doing the same as Zissuu, then the same applies to you, and you do have a conflict of interest. If you have coordinated editing Wikipedia with Zissuu, or if you have agreed to support each other in discussions, then you do have a conflict of interest. The "socking" allegation would then be somehow correct, considering the "meatpuppetry" section of the sockpuppetry policy.
 * If I understand your answer correctly, the second bullet point does not apply to your situation, and you do not have a conflict of interest. Zissuu might have one, but it has nothing to do with you personally. Does this correctly describe the situation?
 * Thank you very much in advance, take care too and best regards, ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi User:ToBeFree, I'm happy because you're seriously trying to find a solution. The world will change after the Corona epidemic and it is important to focus on the essentials. By the way, I hope that you, your family and friends are safe in the North Rhine-Westphalia disaster area! Regarding your intended conclusions: As I see the facts, neither Zissuu nor I have a conflict of interest. Why? Quote: "Zissuu explains on her user page that she "has been doing research in the archives of the gallery and the Lauter family for the past two years, maintaining it and significantly expanding it." This does not mean that she has access to a “Lauter Archive”. As far as I have researched, there is no physical “Lauter Archive” from any of the family members still alive. I think that Zissuu has - like other students, scientists and myself - researched many topics about culture in city archives, university libraries and in the secondary literature, that are - she is convinced – underrepresented on the net and also in WP. When I see the summary of Zissuu, it only becomes clear that she herself has created a large archive with her own «Archive Lauter». The historical facts she collected and she has posted with a lot of commitment in WP articles are definitely not new. I have a lot of respect for this work. Stay healthy and vertical and be well PhilCult84 (talk) --PH_C 22:16, 21 March 2020 (UTC)