User talk:Veritas80

Hello, Veritas80. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 02:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you for your concern regarding the Young Liberals (Australia) Wikipedia page. I have responded on your talk page and on the article's talk page in depth. I look forward to working with you to resolve the issues with this article. I shall keep this notice displayed until a later date as evidence of my respect for Wikipedia's editing guidelines. Veritas80 (talk) 03:55, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * are you a member of the young liberals? you have a new account how come you know about wp guidelines? LibStar (talk) 04:03, 27 December 2012 (UTC)
 * I am not a member of the young liberals. I have learned from and contributed to Whirlpool for many years in many ways so would consider myself knowledgeable and respectful of the community's expectations. Veritas80 (talk) 19:24, 27 December 2012 (UTC)

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident in which you may be involved. Thank you. LibStar (talk) 04:09, 28 December 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you, but I remind you that I will not be stopped from correcting the political bias in the Young Liberals article under any circumstances. I ask that you also engage in a discussion of the content whilst you continue to push your baseless claim of my COI. Veritas80 (talk) 04:01, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
 * interesting you have not bothered to touch other articles despite saying you would... my claim of single purpose editor stands. you were solely interested in the young liberals article in a potential conflict of interest. LibStar (talk) 01:08, 8 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I work and study full time so, as you clearly failed to notice given your utter disregard for engaging in any sort of useful discussion on this article, I have not undertaken any activity on any article or responded to recent edits of the Young Liberals article in the past 2 weeks as I have been very busy. Please do not doubt for a second that I will be addressing the bias in this article and your editing practices as soon as I have the time available. Veritas80 (talk) 00:07, 11 January 2013 (UTC)

other uninvolved editors have made subsequent edits, and I see that as a compromise. which university course asked you to specifically examine political bias in Wikipedia articles? warm regards LibStar (talk) 00:15, 11 January 2013 (UTC)
 * I am not looking for 'compromise' this is not a 'you versus me' 'one side versus the other side' situation despite how much you seem to enjoy vandalizing talk pages and noticeboards for inappropriate purposes. This is about removing bias and non NPOV content from Wikipedia and removing editing privileges of someone abusing Wikipedia. Might I also remind you that at no point did I say I was instructed to investigate bias in Wikipedia. Bias in multimedia, yes, bias in Wikipedia specifically, that's something that came to my attention during my research. Veritas80 (talk) 09:58, 12 January 2013 (UTC)
 * there has been zero violation of WP:VANDAL. if you feel there is vandalism feel free to submit at WP:AIV. you mentioned you stumbled across the YLNP article via a university assignment. which University is this? also in all the time you spent arguing one article you could have easily edited other articles... still waiting. LibStar (talk) 23:35, 13 January 2013 (UTC)

curious as to when you're going to edit other articles as you said you would? rather than be a single purpose editor who claimed to be unconnected with YLNP. LibStar (talk) 05:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Veritas80, you are invited to the Teahouse

 * now that your young liberals has been edited, you may now proceed to edit other articles as you said you would. LibStar (talk) 10:47, 30 December 2012 (UTC)