User talk:Tobermeyer

Welcome!

Hello, Tobermeyer, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice 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. 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 any other 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 firm 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.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
• The five pillars of 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 Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! ES&L 09:16, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Your comments about article deletion

Hello. The comments you added to Wikipedia:Redirect/Deletion reasons have been removed. That page is a Wikipedia guideline, and is not a forum for discussion. There appears to be a current discussion of your request at Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2013 September 20. If you would like to contribute, please do so there. Thanks. – Wdchk (talk) 12:18, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Policy on multiple accounts

Thank you for your contributions. Your editing pattern indicates that you may be using multiple accounts or coordinating editing with people outside Wikipedia. Our policy on multiple accounts usually does not allow this. If you operate multiple accounts directly or with the help of another person, please remember to disclose these connections. – Wdchk (talk) 12:31, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

On the subject of you and Wikipedia

First of all, let me apologize, I have been following the issues that you have brought up about your article on Wikipedia for a while, and nobody deserves some of the treatment you have received.

Now, onto the subject of the article on you. Could you please tell me, in a response here, what parts exactly you feel are defamatory? If you can do such, I will look at it and remove any such parts, per our policy on biographies of living persons.

Also, I feel you will get much further if you do not try to ask for publishing of an "official" or "authorized" biography. Wikipedia is a collaborative encyclopedia where subjects do not control the articles on them. Sadly, this does have some unintended consequences sometimes, especially when someone wants their article deleted.

Based on the discussions, it seems that a large number of Wikipedia users deem you to meet our general notability guideline, enough users that there was no consensus for deletion of your article. I won't opine on the validity of that "ruling", for lack of a better word, but I will say that it's probably not a good idea to push for deletion at this point, since it's likely to have the same result as last time.

Lastly, I do hope that I can help you with these issues. Please don't think that this message is meant to be rude or lecturey, I only mean to help in whatever way I can.

~Charmlet ^-talk- 03:51, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

10/28/13 Can you help? I have tried to again correct the above biography that has serious incorrect facts in it.

I received a Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) from St. Louis University, St. Louis, Missouri 1975 and a Master of Education 1970 from St. Louis University. I received a National Defense Education Act (NDEA) Title 5C scholarship 1968-70. I graduated from Maryville University, St. Louis, Missouri, in 1967 majoring in Political Science and minoring in History, English, and Education. My dissertation was "St. Louis Comprehensive Drug Treatment Center:A Case Study, 1974" which was an analysis of the “Multimodality Drug Treatment Approach.”

I have been a college administrator at four colleges in three states including Lindenwood University, St. Charles, Missouri, Loyola University, Baltimore, Maryland, St. Louis Community College at Florissant Valley, and Anchorage Community College of University of Alaska.

At the bottom of the biography. I have been a licensed Alaska Real Estate Broker since 1979.

Why have you not corrected this?

I would really appreciate it if you would correct these factual issues that are easy to check. Wikipedia is losing credibility by writing incorrect issues that can so easily be checked.

Thanks in advance for any help you can give in this regard.

Please review our policy on editing with a conflict of interest

You clearly have a serious conflict of interest regarding the article about you, and yet you persist in trying to change it to your own specifications. Please review WP:COI, and follow the proscriptions there for those people who cannot edit neutrally: i.e. do not make edits directly to the article, instead make suggestions for changes on the article's talk page, and allow other editors to make those changes if they agree with them. Your attempt to radically change the article in ways that are antithetical to Wikipedia's rules has already resulted in one admin (User:Fram) telling you not to edit the article, and if you continue, it's almost certain that another admin will block you from editing completely. If you wish to continue influencing the article's future, using the COI procedure, or responding to Charmlet's generous offer above, is going to be the only way open to you. Please think this over. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:41, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

You also seem to have a misunderstanding about the way our various pages function. Every article has a Discussion or Talk page attached to it, and it is this page which should be used for discussing the article, not the article itself. Any discussion that's posted to an article is going to be automatically deleted by any editor who comes across it. As for the talk page, it is not to be used for general discussions about the subject (in this case, yourself), but for discussion about how to improve the article. Any general or off-topic discussion on the talk page can be removed under Wikipedia's editing rule. So, if you have suggestions which involve ways in which the article can be improved, please make them on the talk page, and make it clear that you cannot make the change yourself (because of your conflict of interest) and other editors will consider them, perhaps after further discussion. There's really no way to short-circuit this process, so I'd advise you to follow it as best you can. Beyond My Ken (talk) 04:53, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Please do not add defamatory content to Wikipedia, especially if it involves living persons. Thank you. Wikipedia is not a mechanism for airing grievances or making accusations against others. Further disruptive changes may result in a block. LFaraone 16:32, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

October 2013

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 1 week for contravening Wikipedia's biographies of living persons policy. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  LFaraone 17:20, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

This editor returned from her block and repeated precisely the same behavior as before. Normally, the next step in escalating blocks would be for 2 weeks, but I suggest that this editor has no intention of following our policies and procedures and, in fact, has shown her clear disdain for them by her actions. It's obvious that her only purpose in being here is to shape the article about herself exactly the way she wants it. That, of course, might happen if she made her suggestions on the article talk page, accompanied by citations from reliable sources, and other editors agreed with her suggestions and implemented them to the article. However, this editor simply tries to put her version of the article into place by force. We don't have to put up with that kind of behavior.

I believe an indef block is called for, to be lifted when the editor promises to edit within the rules. Beyond My Ken (talk) 22:47, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

10/28/13 If I have done anything improperly, I apologize. I am not an expert on Wikipedia. I am simply trying to correct facts about my bio that can easily be checked.

Thanks for any help you can give.