Talk:Ric Lewis

Requested move 15 August 2019

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: MOVED to Ric Lewis. Uncontroversial move to WP:COMMONNAME. (non-admin closure) CThomas³ (talk) 16:46, 22 August 2019 (UTC)

---

Richard Wayne Lewis → Ric Lewis – I am a fully disclosed paid editor representing Ric Lewis on behalf of Tristan Capitol Partners via Wikinative. The subject of this page asks that the page be moved from its current location to 'Ric Lewis' as this is what he is refered to in the RS. Moreover, Wikipedia's own policy on titles WP:AT clearly states, "Generally, article titles are based on what the subject is called in reliable sources". If you need to verify Ric Lewis's name here is an interview he did with Krishnan Guru-Murthy of all people, https://www.channel4.com/news/season-2-episode-15-ric-lewis Essayist1 (talk) 14:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC)

• Support. On reviewing the references, "Ric Lewis" is indeed the name most often used for this individual. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 15:05, 18 August 2019 (UTC)

Thanks Seraphimblade if no one objects, can I move the page myself? Essayist1 (talk) 09:37, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

Please leave the discussion to run its normal course. Other editors may have input as well. Even in the absence of COI, the editor who opened a discussion shouldn't also close it. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 13:27, 20 August 2019 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Recommend removal of the template

@Essayist1 and Justnumbersandletters:There seems to be a problem with the disclosure of paid editorship. I can't identify who first created the article. However Essayist1 has stepped forward and fully disclosed that they are a paid editor. No one can claim ownership of a WP article So where does disclosure enter in. Does everyone who edits the article have to disclose if they are a paid editor? Or only the person who first created the draft? What distinquishes between a draft creator and a person who fully discloses and requests a move. or even substantially edits? I move that the template be removed in as much as an interested party (Essayist1)has stepped forward. To me this is the same as the original creator (and who is that I ask) fully disclosing.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Oldperson (talk • contribs) 11:23, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Oldperson, you can see who created the page by looking at the page history, either here or by clicking the "View history' tab. It was . Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 10:07, 28 August 2019 (UTC)

Oldperson, I see you may not have received the previous ping since its formatting was incorrect. (I fixed that; I hope the author doesn't mind, but an unclosed template can bork the page formatting). If you (as is presumably true) have no COI yourself, and have reviewed the article and are satisfied that it's neutral, contains no promotion, etc., then you may remove the template. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 21:16, 14 September 2019 (UTC)

Hi @Oldperson:, sorry about my late reply, I have been taking a break from ethical paid-editing while I complete my university work. To answer transparently, my client Tristan Capital disclosed to me that they did hire a paid-contractor to create the page but he created the page at "Richard Wayne Lewis" to sidestep a previous salt. My client has not disclosed which black-hat service they used to create the page. My client is keen to be viewed as a good netizen, and a legitimate WP page written to Wikipedia's content policies is integral to that. Had they known that it was wrong to hire someone to create a page without disclosing a COI they would not have done so.Essayist1 (talk) 14:00, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

Essayist1A common mistake, not realizing one had to disclose, but also a subterfuge for those who know better. Regardless, taking you at your word, the situation has been resolved. If your client is keen to be viewed as a good net-citizen,then why hire a blackhat service to side step a "salt" what ever that isOldperson (talk) 14:40, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

@Oldperson: I don't think they were aware of the ethical alternatives.Essayist1 (talk) 14:44, 18 October 2019 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• Ric Lewis.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 21:07, 8 April 2020 (UTC)