User talk:W R Brown

Welcome!

Hello, W R Brown, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Rick sopher, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. 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 this 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Gaijin42 (talk) 16:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed deletion of Rick Sopher

The article Rick Sopher has been proposed for deletion because, under Wikipedia policy, all newly created biographies of living persons must have at least one reference to a reliable source that directly supports material in the article.

If you created the article, please don't be offended. Instead, consider improving the article. For help on inserting references, see Referencing for beginners, or ask at the help desk. Once you have provided at least one reliable source, you may remove the {{prod blp}} tag. Please do not remove the tag unless the article is sourced. If you cannot provide such a source within ten days, the article may be deleted, but you can request that it be undeleted when you are ready to add one. Gaijin42 (talk) 16:54, 9 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I have edited the page and saved it from deletion for now. But still we would need further references to be added. Any further referencing from reliable sources would be greatly appreciated. werldwayd (talk) 03:56, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much for your additional citations that were very useful and now are used as inline references. From a nomination for deletion to a well-referenced article in just a few days... We have come a long way... We encourage you to add any more additions whenever necessary werldwayd (talk) 19:12, 12 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Possibly unfree File:RICK SOPHER.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:RICK SOPHER.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 13:52, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Link Spam

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

This account appears to be inserting link spam for a firm called LCH Investments into various articles, e.g.[1] SPECIFICO talk 16:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please remove all edits that cite LVH holdings for article content. It is not a reliable source. SPECIFICO talk 16:11, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SPECIFICO - Wikimedia Stewards have been notified that this is a possibly compromised account.— Maile (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Maile66: What is the evidence of the account being compromised? Right from its first edit, 8 years ago, up to its most recent edit, 5 hours ago, the account has been concerned only with promoting one man and businesses associated with him. It looks to me like a straightforward spam account, and I can't see what suggests that it has become compromised. JBW (talk) 19:23, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JBW - Alright. Maybe that explains why no steward replied. I guess I erred, but thought the lapse in time between the original edits and these, was a possible compromise situation. Thanks for explaining. — Maile (talk) 19:32, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@JBW: - I am contacting you to clarify the reasons and provide support for my proposed addition to the Wiki page of Ole Andreas Halvorsen (and others) (31.7.20), which you have reversed (3.8.20) and suggested that the account W R Brown is possibly compromised or suspected spam.

I am seeking to add useful data which has previously been extensively published in the Financial Times (normally on the front page), Wall Street Journal, Institutional Investor and other global media every year since 2011. The information is a useful additional measure of success of a fund manager because it ranks the managers by US$ made for investors, a measure which is not currently referred to on Wikipedia. Current entries for fund managers only refer to their Assets Under Management, or their % returns, and the additional information of the US$ made is useful, or even vital, for an appreciation of the achievements. Links to articles in the FT and Institutional Investor from the most recent year are below. https://www.ft.com/content/81e074cc-3950-11ea-a6d3-9a26f8c3cba4 https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1jyf6s88q5385/Bridgewater-s-Year-May-Have-Been-Bad-But-There-s-More-to-That-Story The FT and other journals based their reports on research by LCH Investments NV, which is an investor in this type of funds (but has no conflict of interest in publishing the research). Please could you; 1. Let me know if I can provide you with more information or justifications; and / or 2. Rollback the correction you made, or let me know how I can reinstate it. Thank you (W R Brown (talk) 11:25, 4 August 2020 (UTC))[reply]

Hello, W R Brown. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Editors who persist in editing for promotion, or contrary to Wikipedia's policies and other requirements, may be blocked from editing by administrators. JBW (talk) 19:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked - August 2020

This is to advise you that your account is blocked due to its long history of advocacy and promotional editing in relation to LCH. You may request unblock by following the instructions on your screen when you try to edit. Risker (talk) 03:47, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... I am contacting you to clarify the reasons and provide support for my proposed addition to the Wiki page of Ole Andreas Halvorsen (and others) (31.7.20), which you have reversed (3.8.20) and suggested that the account W R Brown is possibly compromised or suspected spam.

I am seeking to add useful data which has previously been extensively published in the Financial Times (normally on the front page), Wall Street Journal, Institutional Investor and other global media every year since 2011.

The information is a useful additional measure of success of a fund manager because it ranks the managers by US$ made for investors, a measure which is not currently referred to on Wikipedia. Current entries for fund managers only refer to their Assets Under Management, or their % returns, and the additional information of the US$ made is useful, or even vital, for an appreciation of the achievements.

Links to articles in the FT and Institutional Investor from the most recent year are below. https://www.ft.com/content/81e074cc-3950-11ea-a6d3-9a26f8c3cba4 https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1jyf6s88q5385/Bridgewater-s-Year-May-Have-Been-Bad-But-There-s-More-to-That-Story

The FT and other journals based their reports on research by LCH Investments NV, which is an investor in this type of funds (but has not conflict of interest in publishing the research).

Please could you; 1. Let me know if I can provide you with more information or justifications; and / or 2. Rollback the correction you made, or let me know how I can reinstate it.

Thank you W R Brown (talk) 11:41, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nonsense. SPECIFICO talk 13:42, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to be unblocked, the instructions are clear in the message you get when you try to edit any page but this one. Katie^talk 15:01, 4 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

W R Brown (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I am contacting you to clarify the reasons and provide support for my proposed addition to the Wiki page of Ole Andreas Halvorsen (and others) (31.7.20), which you have reversed (3.8.20) and suggested that the account W R Brown is possibly compromised or suspected spam.

I am seeking to add useful data which has previously been extensively published in the Financial Times (normally on the front page), Wall Street Journal, Institutional Investor and other global media every year since 2011.

The information is a useful additional measure of success of a fund manager because it ranks the managers by US$ made for investors, a measure which is not currently referred to on Wikipedia. Current entries for fund managers only refer to their Assets Under Management, or their % returns, and the additional information of the US$ made is useful, or even vital, for an appreciation of the achievements.

Links to articles in the FT and Institutional Investor from the most recent year are below. https://www.ft.com/content/81e074cc-3950-11ea-a6d3-9a26f8c3cba4 https://www.institutionalinvestor.com/article/b1jyf6s88q5385/Bridgewater-s-Year-May-Have-Been-Bad-But-There-s-More-to-That-Story

The FT and other journals based their reports on research by LCH Investments NV, which is an investor in this type of funds (but has not conflict of interest in publishing the research).

Please could you; 1. Let me know if I can provide you with more information or justifications; and / or 2. Rollback the correction you made, or let me know how I can reinstate it. W R Brown (talk) 09:50, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 10:36, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

W R Brown (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thank you for your explanation, which I have understood, I have sought to amend my approach accordingly in what is now proposed, below.

Far from damaging or disrupting Wikipedia, the information I am seeking to add about the world’s leading money managers already listed on your site will I think greatly add to Wikipedia users’ knowledge.

If you think we have still misunderstood the way of correcting this, please would you explain how we should proceed.

The block is no longer necessary because: 1. I understand that I have been blocked for suspected advocacy and promotional editing in relation to LCH - the object of my proposed entry is certainly not to promote LCH but is to provide useful data on the world’s greatest money managers to wiki readers. This is data on those managers that has previously been reported by major journals (FT, WSJ etc) but is lacking on wiki pages. If you think it necessary to comply with the wiki rules, I would even agree not to mention LCH at all, and to add the useful data and its source in the media articles without mentioning LCH at all. However, the source of the research of this data, as noted in the FT WSJ articles is LCH Investments NV, and normally I would suggest that users would find it useful to have a reference to the original source. 2. I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, 3. .I will make useful contributions instead - the useful contribution being the quantitative measure of returns generated by the world’s greatest money managers, and their firms, which is not currently being made available to wiki readers. W R Brown (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

The problem is that what you see as providing data also happens to be promoting this. TonyBallioni (talk) 23:36, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Nomination of Rick Sopher for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Rick Sopher is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Sopher until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 04:08, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rick Sopher was awarded the Chevalier de la Legion d’Honneur in 2007. ^[1] ^[2] W R Brown (talk) 10:19, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neither of the websites you mention are reliable sources. If you have further comments, please post them at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Sopher, not here. AleatoryPonderings (talk) 10:58, 14 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Hi, unfortunately as I am currently blocked I am unable to post on the Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rick Sopher, as mentioned Rick Sopher was in 2007 awarded the Chevalier de la Legion d’Honneur by France’s then President Chirac, which was presented to him by French Ambassador Gerard Erera at a ceremony on 7 November 2007 at the Ambassador’s residence. As he was a foreign recipient there is no official listing. If the attached photo ^[3] is not a reliable enough source, please could you help/ suggest how better to cite? thx W R Brown (talk) 10:30, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

While blocked, you only have access to this page to request unblock, you cannot use it for any other purpose such as asking others to edit for you. 331dot (talk) 10:58, 17 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

W R Brown (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Thank you for your explanation, which I have understood, I have sought to amend my approach accordingly in what is now proposed, below. Far from damaging or disrupting Wikipedia, the information I am seeking to add about the world’s leading money managers already listed on your site will I think greatly add to Wikipedia users’ knowledge. If you think we have still misunderstood the way of correcting this, please would you explain how we should proceed. The block is no longer necessary because: 1. I understand that I have been blocked for suspected advocacy and promotional editing in relation to LCH - the object of my proposed entry is certainly not to promote LCH but is to provide useful data on the world’s greatest money managers to wiki readers. This is data on those managers that has previously been reported by major journals (FT, WSJ etc) but is lacking on wiki pages. If you think it necessary to comply with the wiki rules, I would even agree not to mention LCH at all, and to add the useful data and its source in the media articles without mentioning LCH at all. However, the source of the research of this data, as noted in the FT WSJ articles is LCH Investments NV, and normally I would suggest that users would find it useful to have a reference to the original source. 2. I will not continue to cause damage or disruption, 3. .I will make useful contributions instead - the useful contribution being the quantitative measure of returns generated by the world’s greatest money managers, and their firms, which is not currently being made available to wiki readers.W R Brown (talk) 3:14 am, 20 August 2020, last Thursday (4 days ago) (UTC−4)

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; user had two open unblock requests and responding admin didn't realize. only (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Help me!

This help request has been answered. If you need more help, you can ask another question on your talk page, contact the responding user(s) directly on their user talk page, or consider visiting the Teahouse.

Please help me with... Wiki entry Rick Sopher - proposed for deletion - please take into account:

MEETS WP:ANYBIO The person has received the Chevalier de la Legion d’Honneur, which is a well-known and significant award or honour. Source: this was reported in one independent press article, a UK national newspaper (The Jewish Chronicle) which carried a photograph and explanation. Such a press source is likely to be the best available for any foreign recipient of this French honour, for which there is no “official list” published online. https://www.pressreader.com/search?query=rick%20sopher&languages=en&groupBy=Language&hideSimilar=0&type=1&state=1

MEETS WP:BASIC A second reason that it meets WP:BASIC is that there is significant coverage in multiple published secondary and independent sources such as Financial Times, Wall Street Journal, Institutional Investor - approximately 30 such references in the past decade. The most recent and best of these should be properly curated for possible inclusion in the wiki entry if the page is not deleted. W R Brown (talk) 17:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC) W R Brown (talk) 17:46, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've left a note on the deletion discussion linking to your arguments here. You may wish to read Wikipedia:So your article has been nominated for deletion, and Wikipedia:Why was the page I created deleted? Seagull123 Φ 18:32, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] ttps://www.pressreader.com/search?query=rick%20sopher&languages=en&groupBy=Language&hideSimilar=0&type=1&state=1

[2] ttps://military.wikia.org/wiki/List_of_foreign_recipients_of_the_L%C3%A9gion_d%27Honneur

[3] ttps://www.pressreader.com/search?query=rick%20sopher&languages=en&groupBy=Language&hideSimilar=0&type=1&state=1

[1]

[2]

[3]