User talk:VictoriahelpsWendi

Hi, I work for Wendi Murdoch. She asked me to please appeal to Wikipedia to publish her correct birthday, which is December 10, 1968. If you need proof that this is her birthday, I can send you a photo of Wendi holding her driver's license.

Her second request is that the name of the article about her be changed to the name she consistently goes by: Wendi Murdoch (without "Deng"). I hope her social media sites are proof that this is how she always refers to herself, despite what the media sometimes refers to her as: https://www.thewendimurdoch.com/ https://www.facebook.com/theWendiMurdoch/

https://twitter.com/theWendiMurdoch

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCDvK3DD0TBBLR4rzJYl2kEA https://www.linkedin.com/in/wendi-murdoch/

https://www.instagram.com/wendimurdoch/

Thank you so much for your help. WendiMurdochAssistant (talk) 11:24, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * Do NOT post any images of identity documents or otherwise send copies of identity documents, they could be used by unscrupulous people to steal her identity. Do you have any sort of source with her birthdate on it(personal website, verified social media, any other source)?  If so,  you should make an edit request on the article talk page.
 * You will need to change your username to something more individualistic; "WendiMurdochAssistant" could be passed to a successor to your position; as such, usernames that refer to a position are not permitted per the username policy. Please visit Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS to change your username. 331dot (talk) 13:44, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * OK you convinced me-- I will not send any personal ID docs. I will tell Wendi that if she wants her correct birthday to appear on Wikipedia, she will need to put it on her Website and/or her other social media accounts. Thanks for taking the wrong birthday off Wikipedia. It is much appreciated. WendiMurdochAssistant (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)
 * I requested a name change. Sorry I did not realize that user name could be a problem. WendiMurdochAssistant (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)


 * You should also read and formally comply with WP:COI(conflict of interest) and WP:PAID(paid editing policy); the latter is required by Wikipedia's Terms of Use. Thanks 331dot (talk) 13:45, 30 May 2019 (UTC)
 * I will do what is needed to comply with Wikipedia's rules. I am sorry I did not know this before. This is all new to me. WendiMurdochAssistant (talk) 18:39, 2 June 2019 (UTC)

Advice against requests for publishing private information
Hi, thank you very much for your edit request. However, I strongly recommend not to request edits that publish potentially private information about article subjects. We can't reliably determine whether you have been authorized to do so. If your client wants to publish private information like birth dates or governmental documents, she should not use Wikipedia as a starting point.

Please also keep in mind that all text on Wikipedia, including talk page content and your request, is public and published under a free license that allows everyone to use the text for any purpose, even commercial, even against the will of the author. This may not be your intention when dealing with private information. If it is, please reconsider your approach to privacy. ~ ToBeFree (talk) 01:04, 5 June 2019 (UTC)

Requested Page Name Change/Move
On June 17, exactly 14 days ago, I made a formal request on Wendi Murdoch’s Wiki article Talk page, to have the name of the article changed, from Wendi Deng Murdoch, to simply “Wendi Murdoch.” I have disclosed my connection to Wendi as her assistant. I explained on the Talk page that Wendi never uses Deng- and offered all her social media and other personal accounts as proof that she exclusively uses Wendi Murdoch as her name.

My understanding, after reading many Wiki pages about the issue of “moving” a page, is that it can be done at any time by any editor, unless there is some controversy regarding the name change. Although I don’t see why or how this request can be controversial, nevertheless, a seven-day discussion was begun. During that time one editor voiced his/her approval of the move, but instead of the move being made, the discussion was relisted for an additional 7 days, for no clear reason that I understand, and that seems to even go against Wikipedia’s own policies.

The second 7-day period has ended, and it attracted only one other editor, who is against the move, but concedes that at least half of the general media indeed refers to her as Wendi Murdoch.

I am now requesting help to close the discussion and get the page moved immediately. It seems this would comply with Wikipedia guidelines, especially those regarding Biographies of Living Persons. I sincerely thank you for your help. VictoriahelpsWendi (talk) 09:13, 3 July 2019 (UTC)


 * I'll try to help you understand but even an admin can't change some things unilaterally. The reason the discussion was extended was because, as you observed, there was limited participation. The discussion was closed with "No consensus to move, after extended time for discussion. bd2412 T 16:27, 4 July 2019 (UTC)" Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. This means that the naming conventions of articles are decided with the input of the community. While the biographies of living people policy demands sensitivity for inclusion of facts/material as well as rigorous use of reliable sources, it doesn't completely cover what editors decide is the best form of a name. "Deng", as her family name, is significant and editors decided to include it as part of the name. Wikipedia operates through the talk page and consensus process to reach decisions on such matters. I'm not entirely sure what else can be done. If you have more questions, please ask. I'm going to leave your request for admin help up in case some other admin wants to pitch in here. Cheers, Mark Ironie (talk) 02:45, 5 July 2019 (UTC)
 * There is no administrative action required here. A move was proposed, the discussion ran for an appropriate length of time, it was legitimately closed with no consensus to change the title. There seems to be no reason to reopen the discussion save for the fact that the proposer does not like the result - which is not a sufficient reason. As such, I am closing the template; there is nothing here that requires an administrator's attention. Yunshui 雲 水  10:27, 5 July 2019 (UTC)