User talk:OliverKamm

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Welcome[edit]

Hello, OliverKamm, and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. 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}} and your question on your user talk page, and someone will show up shortly to answer. Here are a few good links for newcomers:

We hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! By the way, you can sign your name on talk and vote pages using four tildes, like this: ~~~~. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! CWC(talk) 20:49, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Neil Clark (writer)[edit]

Neil Clark (writer) has been proposed for deletion. An editor felt this person might not be notable enough for an article. Please review Wikipedia:Notability (people) for the relevant guidelines. If you can improve the article to address these concerns, please do so.

If no one objects to the deletion within five days by removing the "prod" template, the article may be deleted without further discussion. If you remove the prod template, the article will not be deleted, but if an editor is still not satisfied that it meets Wikipedia guidelines, it may still be sent to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion, where it may be deleted if consensus to delete is reached. NickelShoe (Talk) 03:28, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

E-mail[edit]

Oliver, if possible, could you e-mail me, please, using the link in the toolbox on my user page? Many thanks, SlimVirgin (talk) 17:25, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: Clark talk page[edit]

I've removed all of your comments from the talk page because they aren't constructive and because they are causing a significant amount of distress for the subject as well as Wikipedia. In the future, you need to have a source for any allegations and you need to keep your opinions to yourself. An article's talk page is to be used only for discussing the article itself, not the subject. John Reaves 20:00, 28 October 2008 (UTC)

Mr Reaves, I almost agree with you, but for one material point. You are certainly right to remove comments that place Wikipedia in an invidious position. I have asked you to do this with regard to my own comments, which were initially sparked by an erroneous reference to me, and I pointed out that you have no option but to take at face value Mr Clark's own biography of himself rather than my correction of it. But if you carry, on Mr Clark's talk page, an assertion that - ludicrously, fantastically - I am in receipt of a police warning for harassment, then you must surely perceive my reasons for responding to that hugely damaging and false claim. You will forgive me for being more interested in correcting genuinely actionable assertions than I am in the emotional sensibilities of Mr Clark. I never seek the removal of any material about me published on the Internet, but I do consider it reasonable to rebut an allegation of that type in the place where it occurs, and I would prefer to do this directly and immediately rather than pursue some alternative course that might make Mr Clark even more distressed than he is already. I should therefore appreciate it if you would reinstate that response. Incidentally, I have plenty of opportunity to comment about Mr Clark, and have no intention of doing so in a Wikipedia article. But it is just a fact that Mr Clark's standards of veracity are a subject of discussion in the public realm, in recognised secondary sources.OliverKamm (talk) 12:11, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
If you have any specific concerns over material relating to you, it'd be best to either a) contact me or another administrator or b) attempt to quietly remove it yourself. The latter is likely to work more smoothly than the former. I will look at the talk page right now and see if I can find anything that needs to be removed. John Reaves 19:43, 29 October 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for that; I'd indeed appreciate it if you or another administrator were to examine that page. But my preference, given the choice, is for course A rather than for course B, despite the greater complication, as I don't wish to constrain Mr Clark from saying what he wants. He is, as you point out and as I have observed, under intense emotional distress, and I don't wish to exacerbate his condition. But such an extraordinary and plainly actionable accusation as that I'm under police warning is not a matter of opinion (which would be protected by the defence of fair comment) but a claim about fact. I'm disinclined to let it pass without correction in the place where it appears. That correction may come from me, in the response I have already written and that you deleted, or from him; but it needs to come.OliverKamm (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2008 (UTC)