User talk:Tony Monaghan 1968

Welcome!
Hello, Tony Monaghan 1968, and welcome to Wikipedia!&#32;Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article.&#32;Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms our use and policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
 * The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * Tutorial
 * How to edit a page and How to develop articles
 * How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
 * Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place  before the question. Again, welcome! JarrahTree 08:17, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018
Your recent editing history shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing&mdash;especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring&mdash;even if you don't violate the three-revert rule&mdash;should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. JarrahTree 08:16, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

adding references
Please note that Wikipedia is WP:NOT a CV dumping site. It is not a blog, or website, but an online encyclopedia - most of the text you have utilised is not conforming to WP:MOS for WP:BLP - your language and style is not WP:ABOUT. Please have a close look at other biographies that have achieved some status to see how wikipedia deals with living people. Thank you. JarrahTree 08:31, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

December 2018
Hello, I'm Qualitist. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Kate Lamont have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. Qualitist (talk) 08:50, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Help me!
Please help me with...I'm a little confused, I've been told I'm in an editing war but have no idea why. All I tried to do was update Kate Lamont's wiki page so that it was current

Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 08:54, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * You simply revert others reversion without understanding what that entails - WP:3RR means if you revert again you are WP:BLOCKable.


 * Please read the messages on your talk page' - and after that, try asking. You have been left with a few, you need to be au fait with the content of the messages, and what they infer.  If you need walking through what the messages entail, (your edits suggest a lack of understanding what WP:ABOUT) you need to show you understand what you have been sent. JarrahTree 09:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * Your edits were removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. They were copied from the link: https://www.committeeforperth.com.au/about-us/who-we-are/our-board .. If you are the copyright holder, please read Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images&mdash;you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Copying text from other sources for more information. Qualitist (talk) 09:08, 3 December 2018 (UTC)


 * 1) To answer your question, "edit-warring" means that you have been repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. Wikipedia works by consensus and discussion, not by individual editors keeping on plugging the version of an article which they prefer, presumably in the hope that other editors will eventually give up. If we allowed that kind of method, the result would be that eventually the most stubborn editor would get his or her way.
 * 2) In addition to the other matters mentioned above, a Wikipedia article needs to be written from a neutral point of view, but the content you have added to the article Kate Lamont was far from neutral: it was strongly promotional, clearly intended to give the reader the impression that she is admirable and worthy of praise. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:01, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Hello, Tony Monaghan 1968. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * 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 must 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 WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:10, 3 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks JarrahTree, JamesBWatson and Qualitist for your help and advice. It was never my intention to offend or break the rules. Thanks for pointing me in the right direction and providing me with the information I needed.

Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 00:48, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

Completely mystified why others need to duplicate the original messages (better in triplicate I suppose) - the very first revert was made because of the text reading like a promo item. with enough edits to your user name, your capacity to understand what goes on might help. If in fact you are located in Australia - we do have editors who are only too pleased to help in getting material closer to the regular requirements of what constitutes a good biography of a living people. JarrahTree 04:35, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

JarrahTree, I put up my hand and say with hand on heart, I'm not that tech-savvy. The first time the post was taken down it was explained to me that I needed to cite references, so I did that in the second. When the second was taken down, I assumed I had made a mistake because of my lack of tech skills and put it back up. And I had no idea I was getting notifications from people and was in an edit war. And even then I struggled to read and respond. Yes, I'm a middle aged-man, trying to wrangle technology who made some honest mistakes, nothing more, nothing less.

I'm gratefully accepting the invite to Teahouse so I can learn how to post on Wikipedia without upsetting anyone - it's never been my intention in life.

Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 01:24, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

The teahouse is an automatically generated item for new editors to inform, encourage and inspire.

If in fact you are australian, or western australian based - there are ways to either be tutored online or in real life if you were the slightest interested. You can go the way of the teahouse, however like a lot of the lottery on this wonderful weird place, you can find some are more helpful than others. It all depends.

Biography is fraught, and perhaps not the wisest way to start. It is always worth reverse engineering articles, and getting to see inside what makes things tick, if you are interested in doing it that way. If you have interests in any way away from entrepeneurs, try looking at something to edit, to get a handle on things. Maybe you can find an item with a spelling mistake or nonsensical grammar - just a sense of expanding the experience. Once you get to a level of edit count, then, you are able to expand and attain more rights. A lot depends on you disposition once you are in. Starting blocks of text as a new editor, can be quite traumatic for some - as the bots/editors and all descend upon certain actions.

There are vast portions of the content that need attention - it all depends where you want to travel. You dont have to outline your background or interest verbatim here on wiki (it is all here for all to see), but simply editing or looking around might help. JarrahTree 01:35, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the advice JarrahTree, I appreciate it and will have a look around and start my learning journey by taking baby-steps and editing articles. Cheers Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

There be monsters here, and the place can be a nasty vicious jungle with voracious egos the size of the planet, but you never know, there can also some very nice quiet corners where you can potter around more or less invisible, simply improving the place. Best of luck, and never let anyone put you off - there should always be the opportunity to learn a bit more... when in doubt either simply walk away from bad things, or ask for help. Never worth arguing with mastodons - No_angry_mastodons - (an aside to things recent new editors dont seem to be guided towards...) JarrahTree 01:56, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks again, and I'll tread with care and walk away from ego-filled fights! Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 02:00, 5 December 2018 (UTC)


 * The way that was expressed was highly ambiguous, and is one of the shortcomings of dealing with online issues - is that ambiguities and nuances are not very well translated into on wiki items and interactions - in some cases and contexts misinterpretations can run rife with their own life, in unexpected ways. Take care when dealing with others if you are not sure, they (as the essay linked suggests) might be having a bad day or whatever... or as a newbie, you can be thrown a heap of acronyms and short cuts that seem overwhelming - however slowly, slowly WP:There is no deadline - and even there heisenberg rules... (uncertainy) JarrahTree 02:06, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Very good advice about no deadlines and avoiding ambiguity. To be honest, I was overwhelmed with the responses to my post but rather than resile or react badly, I'm using it as a learning journey. Never too old and all that....

Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 02:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Kate Lamont (December 12)
 Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by CNMall41 was:

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.


 * If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Kate Lamont and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
 * If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Kate Lamont, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "db-self" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
 * If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Kate_Lamont Articles for creation help desk] or on the [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:CNMall41&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:Afc_decline/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=Draft:Kate_Lamont reviewer's talk page].
 * You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

CNMall41 (talk) 05:39, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Kate
If you have experience in editing in other spaces fine, if you focus on Kate for too long - there will be the impression you are in fact an WP:SPA and in all likelihood you will be blocked for one reason or other (probably WP:COI in relation to what a google search will cough up against your user name), take care!! JarrahTree 05:53, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

In fact - https://www.committeeforperth.com.au/about-us/who-we-are/our-board - and https://www.brandagency.com.au/views/2015/committee-for-perth - in some contexts, I know some admins would block you on the spot. The COI is more or less unravellable. Try a different user name, try to actually find references, but really in the end, unless there is sign of interest in anything other than Kate - I would say, goodbye at this stage. JarrahTree 06:06, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your advice Jarrah Tree. Tony Monaghan 1968 (talk) 06:11, 12 December 2018 (UTC)

Your draft article, Draft:Kate Lamont


Hello, Tony Monaghan 1968. It has been over six months since you last edited the Articles for Creation submission or Draft page you started, "Kate Lamont".

In accordance with our policy that Wikipedia is not for the indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace, the draft has been nominated for deletion. If you plan on working on it further, or editing it to address the issues raised if it was declined, simply and remove the, , or  code.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you wish to retrieve it, you can request its undeletion by following the instructions at this link. An administrator will, in most cases, restore the submission so you can continue to work on it.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. CptViraj (📧) 04:50, 14 June 2019 (UTC)