User talk:Chella123

Dear Chellappa.M,

You wrote me a few minutes ago letting me know that you are only following instructions from someone else.

Can you provide me with the contact e-mail for this individual as I would like to communicate with them directly.

My posts are accurate as the records of the company, and the final ruling from the American Arbitration Association bear these out. Therefore, my posts should not be removed from Wikipedia.

Please allow me to communicate with this individual, as your previous communication to me indicated that you are only following instructions to remove my posts.

Thank you in advance for your reply.

Most Sincerely,

Steve Ross

Stevejross 20:33, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

=================================================================================

October 27

Dear Chella123,

I would like to open up a discussion with you. Below, I have copied from Wikipedia the first recommended step towards resolving editing differences. I have also copied a comment from another person posted regarding his observations on my posts.

I do request that you would take the time to communicate directly with me. It is important that this site remains factually accurate.

You have not yet responded to my earlier requests for a discussion.

Thank you for your response.

Sincerely,

Steve Ross

Stevejross 20:12, 27 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First Step Recommended from article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Resolving_disputes

First step: Talk to the other parties involved

The first resort in resolving almost any conflict is to discuss the issue on a talk page, you may even post the proposed content on the talk page. Either contact the other party on that user's talk page, or use the talk page associated with the article in question. Never carry on a dispute on the article page itself. When discussing an issue, stay cool and do not mount personal attacks. Take the other person's perspective into account and try to reach a compromise. Assume that the other person is acting in good faith unless you have clear evidence to the contrary.

Both at this stage and throughout the dispute resolution process, talking to other parties is not simply a formality to be satisfied before moving on to the next forum. Failure to pursue discussion in good faith shows that you are trying to escalate the dispute instead of resolving it. This will make people less sympathetic to your position and may prevent you from effectively using later stages in dispute resolution. In contrast, sustained discussion

It is well known that Stephen J. Ross is the founder of the company. I don't see any reason for disagreement here.--Lettherebelight | Talk 09:49, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Hi! You might want to read WP:NPOV. WP:COI and WP:SPA. In short, editing an article on behalf of a company to reflect "information’s that we like to highlight regarding our company" is not acceptable. Wikipedia articles should be neutral and verifiable. Wikipedia is not a place for advertising. You are welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, however, if you are perceived as editing in a tendentious manner, you may be blocked from editing at all. --Stephan Schulz 23:36, 29 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Removing sourced information from the article

Hello Chella123. In this edit you removed some information about the company's history from the article. Please explain and discuss this type of change. Do you believe that the information is wrong? Removal of information without comment is sometimes criticized here. If sources are incorrect, tell us which ones. EdJohnston 02:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hello again. See a discussion of the activities at UST Global at the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard#UST Global, where your name has been mentioned. You are welcome to join that discussion and add your own comments. EdJohnston 03:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you continue to make changes to the page without explanation, you may be blocked from editing here. Sourced information can't be removed without a reason. You're telling us that YOU are correct, and Business Week is wrong. Please join the discussion and explain what you're doing! EdJohnston 13:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Block for 48 hours

You have been blocked from editing Wikipedia for a period of 48 hours as a result of your disruptive edits. You are free to make constructive edits after the block has expired, but please note that vandalism (including page blanking or addition of random text), spam, deliberate misinformation, privacy violations, personal attacks; and repeated, blatant violations of our policies concerning neutral point of view and biographies of living persons will not be tolerated. Bearian 13:43, 1 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Explanation

Dear EDJohnston and Bearian, I am not here to harm any one or to put any unnecessary information in Wikipedia pages. Here in UST Global wikipedia page I update the latest information regarding UST Gloabal so that wikipedia users get the right information under right category.

1) Under Corporate Milestones: Company achievements needs to be listed. 2) The link http://investing.businessweek.com/research/stocks/private/snapshot.asp?privcapId=4298931 may have the recent major information about UST Global, but the top part of the page that mentions about "Key Executives" is totally wrong. Two people and their postions who are not part of UST Global is being mentioned here. 3) UST Global is a Company where in past there may have a lot of people who were part of this company in key roles/posts (during their asscociation with the company their names may have been part of this Company related records), but once they left this company searching for other oppurtunities i dont understand why they want to mention their name associated with UST Global. This is like self advertisement which is totally against wikipedia policy

Please advice me if i am wrong in my understanding.

Thank you, Chellappa.M Chella123 06:27, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Can you tell us where the current list of executives can be found on UST Global's own web site?

It is conceivable that some of the Business Week information is out of date, but it's up to us to decide whether the BW article still has any background value. As a person connected to the company, it is not your business to delete references from the article. EdJohnston 14:57, 2 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Link to UST Global leadership team

Hi EdJohnston,

Please find UST Global leadership team in the link http://www.ust-global.com/leadership.aspx

Do you really want to have external links that have outdated/wrong info about an article in Wikipedia? Wiki is an Encyclopedia which is most popular in the world and widely used for collecting accurate information about anything under the sun.

Can I ask you to check few pages in Wikipedia itself regarding UST Global content and find what i am trying to say here? This is very important. Could you please check the link http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=UST_Global&limit=500&action=history.

This link takes you to the earliest revision history page of UST Global. Please find when this page was initially drafted and when did the user Steve Ross started editing the page. This wikipedia page was started in 2005 and Steve came in to picture by 2007. The most interesting thing here you can find is the first few edits by Steve Ross. He added himself as co-founder of UST where right now he wants to mention himself as founder of the company. Don’t you find that this user is inconsistent with his edits and this proves that his intention is to advertise himslef? Also could you please check whether this user has contributed anything else in this Wiki page other than adding his name in different roles of UST Global?

All you want to know about UST Global is available in their website (www.ust-global.com). Also I want to repeat here that I am not here to violate any rules or policies of Wikipedia. I just want to point out the anomalies in this Wiki page. Chella123 06:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm just doing maintenance tasks this week (midterms, local elections). If this issue can wait until next week, I'll help you out. Bearian 13:50, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Since no published source connects Stephen Ross to the company, and there is no way to verify his role as founder, I removed his name from the article. It can be added back if any reliable sources are found. EdJohnston 14:13, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest/Noticeboard#UST_Global. I think that says it all. When you do find a reliable source for a fact, you can put it back in. Until that time, no news is good news. Sorry for having to block you. Bearian 19:23, 6 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Clean up

As requested, I've started to clean up the article. Bearian (talk) 18:50, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've had no time to work on this since. Later? Bearian (talk) 16:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]