User talk:Herr Peter Klein

November 2012[edit]

Hello, I'm Tgeairn. I noticed that you recently made an edit to Jay Westervelt that seemed to be a test. Your test worked! If you want more practice editing, the sandbox is the best place to do so. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, Tgeairn (talk) 03:53, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Jay Westervelt with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. Sue Rangell ✍ ✉ 04:33, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jay Westervelt, you may be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Jay Westervelt was changed by Herr Peter Klein (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.980141 on 2012-11-15T02:17:53+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 02:17, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

December 2012[edit]

This is your last warning. The next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Jay Westervelt, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 02:55, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Very clear conflicts of interest[edit]

Hello, Herr Peter Klein. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Jay Westerveld, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

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.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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 a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

Hello, Herr Peter Klein. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Glenmere mansion, you may need to consider our guidance on conflicts of interest.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

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.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content 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 a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you.

To be clear, you've made contentious edits and commentary, mainly at Jay Westerveld, the talk page, and on User talk:Semperfly. These, plus a quick Google search, indicate you are associated with the Glenmere mansion and have a real-life (and problematic) connection to Jay Westerveld. In fact, you seem to be a single-purpose account for that article. Please refrain from contributing any further to discussions where you have performed in an unobjective manner. Even to rub in the fact that something was de-fluffed by a neutral third party. It's just not productive in regards to encyclopedic content, nor is it particularly civil. Note, civility is required on Wikipedia. Cheers. JFHJr (㊟) 15:54, 24 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]