User talk:StonefieldBreeze

Welcome!

Hello, StonefieldBreeze, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit The Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome! SmartSE (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A few questions

Have you previously edited using one or more other accounts? If so, what account or account?
Do you know, or are you in any way personally connected to, any of the people you have edited about?
Are you paid to edit Wikipedia, or is your editing a part of work that you are paid for? SmartSE (talk) 21:58, 7 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited Wikipedia before, however, I retired in good standing and am on the Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians list.
I am fortunate to know the person that I am editing.
No, I have not been paid to edit Wikipedia.

I'm assuming this is related to the User_talk:Favonian#WP:G4_deletion_of_John_Basedow_per_Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion.2FJohn_Basedow. StonefieldBreeze (talk) 21:43, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, StonefieldBreeze. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article John Basedow, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Lemongirl942 (talk) 03:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

File permission problem with File:John Basedow Weight Lifting.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:John Basedow Weight Lifting.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file has agreed to release it under the given license.

If you are the copyright holder for this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either

make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en@wikimedia.org, stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add {{OTRS pending}} to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to permissions-en@wikimedia.org.

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Wikipedia:Non-free content, use a tag such as {{non-free fair use}} or one of the other tags listed at Wikipedia:File copyright tags#Fair use, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See Wikipedia:File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. You may wish to read Wikipedia's image use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Amanda (aka DQ) 15:43, 17 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Please do not remove maintenance templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to John Basedow, without resolving the problem that the template refers to, or giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your removal of this template does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Thank you. Widefox; talk 12:32, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, StonefieldBreeze. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places, or things you have written about in the article John Basedow, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Widefox; talk 13:08, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at John Basedow, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Almost WP:SPA WP:COI account, strange edit pattern of other challenging notability of another promo articles indicates undisclosed commercial editing, and possible sock/meat. COIN listing for long-term promo page. Widefox; talk 13:12, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Widefox; talk 13:26, 15 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The remark that "strange POV edit pattern of challenging notability of another WP:N failing advert article [1] [2] indicates undisclosed commercial editing, potential for sock/meat." for Patrick Mackaronis is silly. I was the one who initially tagged the article on WP:N grounds (as the article was blatantly promotional and lacked sourcing), and it was uncontroversially deleted (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Patrick Mackaronis).
I am fortunate enough to have met Basedow, as have thousands of others, given his line of work. This does not warrant a WP:COI tag.

StonefieldBreeze (talk) 17:34, 6 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

That answer doesn't disclose, or deny. I repeat, can you confirm that you have a connection with the subject, or are paid to edit, or have any sort of COI, or any thing that should be disclosed per WP:TOU and/or WP:COI. Do you have, or had other accounts or edited as an IP here? This accounts editing history doesn't add up with a newbie account, so can you explain? Widefox; talk 02:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here [3] you claimed "No, I have not been paid to edit Wikipedia. Several of us have asked over several months about your connection with the subject, bearing in mind WP:COITALK. Widefox; talk 02:10, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There is no COI to disclose or deny. I have not been paid to edit here. As mentioned earlier, I have edited Wikipedia before, however, I retired in good standing and am on the Wikipedia:Missing Wikipedians list.StonefieldBreeze (talk) 21:19, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Here [4] you claim to know the subject. Did you read WP:COI ? Widefox; talk 16:26, 12 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As mentioned previously, I am fortunate enough to have met Basedow, as have thousands of others, given his line of work. I have no further connection with the subject. That said, I've noticed you've also {{COI}} tagged several other articles I've edited including Grant Cardone [5] and most recently LittleThings [6]. I've read WP:COI, but I don't understand how it would apply.StonefieldBreeze (talk) 01:46, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

May 2017

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at John Basedow, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. long term promo editing against "rough consensus" and maintenance, failure to convincingly disclose a COI, long term edit warring against consensus [7] POV pushing/promo continuing until now. Take up at WP:COIN and follow procedures/guidelines of requested edits. Continuing this disruption may result in a block. Widefox; talk 01:48, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please link to the consensus against the addition of the advocacy section. I cannot find one on the article's talk page.StonefieldBreeze (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Laddypat, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Widefox; talk 09:51, 10 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]