User talk:Roryridleyduff

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Roryridleyduff, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, your edit to an article does not conform to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy (NPOV), and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Beloved Freak 10:18, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Pretty Persuasion

Hello, I have removed some of the information you added to Pretty Persuasion because it appears to be original research, ie. your own opinion not backed up by reliable sources. --Beloved Freak 10:20, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Writing about yourself

Hello. You seem to be citing your own writing and adding text about your own work a lot. That is not really good, specially when it is something controversial. Specifically, Wikipedia should we written from a neutral point of view, not from the writers point of view. --Apoc2400 (talk) 17:46, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflicts of interest

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should 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;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
avoid breaching relevant 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 conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for businesses. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. --Cailil ^talk 19:31, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Pursuant to the above comment by Apoc2400 and this notice please read Wikipedia:Suggestions_for_COI_compliance for further information--Cailil ^talk 19:35, 13 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies Rory

There is absolutely no evidence that Rory Ridley-Duff has acted in anything but the interests of informing the public, and that done according to Wikipedia policy.

It seems a very reasonable conclusion that User:Roryridleyduff is indeed the lecturer he claims to be. A full list of his quality contributions to Wikipedia to this date are linked below. He has phrased his contributions from the NPOV, as one would expect from a professional academic, and he has cited a range of the best sources available on each of the topics he has contributed to. Additionally, Rory's contributions address systematic biases that Wikipedia typically fails to identify and address without assistance from contributors with wide exposure to the best literature. There is no conflict of interest involved with Rory citing his own doctoral dissertation: it is available free of charge at his own web-site, and he is an established academic already. We need not suppose the rather bizarre motive that a citation at Wiki could provide any advantage in academic discourse and appointment, and certainly no financial advantage.

Rory is an expert in co-operative enterprise, recognized as such by his peers. His contributions at Wiki are welcome, not on the basis of his expertise however, but on the basis of his good faith. To date we have no reason to doubt that, and his use of his real name is a pledge that we never shall. Alastair Haines (talk) 07:08, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

16/03/09	2	Talk:Men's rights
16/03/09	16	Men's rights
21/01/09	1	User talk:Apoc2400
21/01/09	1	User:Roryridleyduff
12/01/09	22	Cooperative
11/01/09	6	Cooperative
11/01/09	3	Talk:Worker cooperative
10/01/09	9	Seduction
09/01/09	35	Intimacy
28/12/08	13	Worker cooperative
28/12/08	2	Flirting
28/12/08	7	Dating (activity)
28/12/08	29	Courtship
28/12/08	1	Seduction
27/12/08	12	Employee ownership
06/12/08	15	Corporate governance
06/12/08	11	Discrimination
01/12/08	5	Rationality

PS Administrative note. I have good reason to suppose that Rory's "deleted contributions" may demonstrate systematic bias against the reliably sourced and neutral contributions he has been providing. I am aware of that being the case in at least one article, which is how I discovered Rory's account. Under the circumstances, it would aid the transparency of our management of systematic bias for Rory's deleted contributions to date to be available for public scrutiny. Alastair Haines (talk) 07:27, 6 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

August 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia, and thank you for your contributions. One of the core policies of Wikipedia is that articles should always be written from a neutral point of view. A contribution you made to September 11 attacks appears to carry a non-neutral point of view, and your edit may have been changed or reverted to correct the problem. Please remember to observe our core policies. Thank you. // Chris ^{(complaints)•(contribs)} 17:09, 21 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]