User talk:Theroadislong

Conflict of interest on The Urantia Book

You tagged an article as having a major contributor with a conflict of interest, but failed to name any one. Without knowing which edits to investigate, I'm not sure how to address your concerns. Please elaborate on the talk page so we can continue to improve this article. Thank you! Xaxafrad (talk) 18:46, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

I've removed the tag, I don't recall what led me to put it there. Theroadislong (talk) 19:07, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

Having looked in more detail I see now that it was this [1] that led me to tag the article.Theroadislong (talk) 19:23, 4 October 2012 (UTC)

npov

Myth and speculation are not neutral words when describing the Tower of Babel.andycjp (talk) 11:55, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

A myth is a sacred narrative usually explaining how the world or humankind came to be in its present form, although, in a very broad sense, the word can refer to any traditional story. I don't see any problem with neutrality here?Theroadislong (talk) 12:04, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Andycjp, these are controversial subjects that I would advise we leave alone right now. I encourage you to do simple editing, like looking for spelling errors or link fixes.  — Jason Sosa 16:16, 10 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello, The cited reference was not from a blog,but from an interview given to open & shut and the cited reference is a conversation between plos co-founder(Michael Eisen) and journalist (Richard Poynder) 182.73.13.166 (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

plos one -sited reference

Hello, The cited reference was not from a blog,but from an interview given to open & shut and the cited reference is a conversation between plos co-founder(Michael Eisen) and journalist (Richard Poynder) 182.73.13.166 (talk) 17:47, 16 October 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 182.73.13.166 (talk)

The reference was a blog... http://poynder.blogspot.in/ the clue is in the url?Theroadislong (talk) 17:54, 16 October 2012 (UTC)

Trinity College London page

Hello Thanks for your message about the Trinity College London page. I understand about conflicts of interest, so I tried to edit the page neutrally, and chose a user name that identified us so that people would know that we were behind the edit. I'll change the user name (if I can work out how to do that!). In the meantime, could you save the new content of the page, and let me know if any of my edits betray the conflict of interest. I'll happily change them. As I noted in the talk page, details of our qualifications can be found on the independent Ofqual website.

Many thanks for your help

PS I suppose I should add that we weren't trying to promote the organisation, simply to give people accurate information - presumably it's better for Wikipedia to be accurate rather than misleading!

Best wishes — Preceding unsigned comment added by Trinity College London (talk • contribs) 08:48, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Trinity College London

Revert

Can you please explain why you reverted my edit to WT:FTN, and why you marked it as minor. IRWolfie- (talk) 19:10, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Sincere apologies I can only asume it was a slip of the finger on my laptop? Though how it got marked as minor too I have no idea! Once again sorry! All good wishesTheroadislong (talk) 19:20, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

I'm watching "Stand up to Cancer" on TV but my fingers are obviously doing there own thing!Theroadislong (talk) 19:27, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

No worries :) IRWolfie- (talk) 19:28, 19 October 2012 (UTC)

Allison R. Palmer

Hi, You added a "who says"-tag to the Allison R. Palmer article I created recently. The qualification "leading expert on the Cambrian period", that the tag applies to is actually verbatum from the German wiki article of which the English page is basically a translation. Although it is not as such in the cited websites, I would uphold the qualification is covered by the assessment of Palmer's achievements described on those websites. Any suggestions? Kind regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 10:45, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

I really do think it needs a reference, a quick search on Google for "leading expert on the Cambrian period" gives many, many results, none of which mention Palmer. It looks like your opinion or original research.Theroadislong (talk) 20:52, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

OK, I've made some changes to both sentences you had trouble with. I hope you agree. Regards, Dwergenpaartje (talk) 09:28, 21 October 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Thanks for advising of removing my comment in such a gracious way. It is a bit frustrating to read anything on Wikipedia concerning AIDS. Those raising honest questions are sidelined and negated just as in popular media. It would be nice if Wikipedia could be a little different. Pak*1008 (talk) 04:11, 23 October 2012 (UTC)

Horticulture Page

Please restore the two links you deleted. Both are relevant to this topic and provide readers with additional accurate information on this subject. Thank you. EmeraldhorticultureEmeraldhorticulture (talk) 14:26, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia is not a directory, you added a reference that contained no info about the sentence it followed and you also added it as an external link, the article already has far too many external links, you can argue your case on the talk page if you wish?Theroadislong (talk) 15:21, 26 October 2012 (UTC)

Conservapedia

FYI please see this talk section NewsAndEventsGuy (talk) 14:29, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

I was referring to the reference following the next sentence. http://www.presstelegram.com/entertainment/ci_5856330 I would have thought it was irrelevant what they "self describe" as? No worries though.Theroadislong (talk) 14:49, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

CCATT

I added a link to our unofficial website www.ccatt.info. This website was designed, coded and is run by me exclusively so there should not be any conflict of interest or copyright issues. I also added our CCATT Fact Sheet which is freely distributable information and is not copyrighted. The Air Force Times article that cites this text was taken directly from this Fact Sheet so it is not their original content. Can you please restore these additions so that an accurate description of what we do is available?

Capt John-Michael "Shaggy" Fowler — Preceding unsigned comment added by CCATRN (talk • contribs) 20:07, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Happy to add back the external link but you cannot copy and paste content from your fact sheet.Theroadislong (talk) 20:14, 29 October 2012 (UTC)

Amity

Dear Theroadislong,

Thank you for your guidance on editing the Amity University page. As you are an experienced editor I would really like your help in how to resolve the issues.

First of all i feel that wifione has some bias. He used to edit the IIPM page which is a competitor of IIPM and always tries to damage Amity in all ways. Many editors used to be after wifione why he is so positive and biased for IIPM. Then he started targeting Amity. On wifiones talk page we have long time ago discussed all points in detail but he is just not open to listening.

I will give two examples. He keeps saying that Amity University is not approved by AICTE. as is clear from a link in the Article itself, Universities in India do not need AICTE approval. then where is the need to write that Amity does not have the approval. That way, all pages of Indian Universities should say that. But why only for Amity?

Also he keeps uploading information about Arrest warrants against a living person. There are no warrants against this living person. wifione is linking to old articles which were taken out by a group of blackmailers to malign the image of a respectable man. this issue was cleared and the magazine tehelka which started this whole thing, from where other publications copied the information from, had taken off the article after the owners realised the mischief of the journalist. so now to say that there is an arrest warrant against a living person with no substantial proof is highly damaging. what do we do?

like this virtually everything that wifione puts up is done in a way to damage Amity. Amity is one of the most respected education groups in India with over 100,000 students. such wrong details really badly affect the students. If any of these things were true, why would so many students be studying at Amity? I really need your help.Higheredutrust (talk) 10:17, 2 November 2012 (UTC)

• Fyi and best regards. Wifione ^Message 16:08, 2 November 2012 (UTC)