June 2021
edit
Hello Burtonwj. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.
Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.
Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Burtonwj. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Burtonwj|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. – NJD-DE (talk) 20:25, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- I have received non compensation apart from a thank you via email, I was asked on LinkedIn by Alia Caan if I can make the necessary changes as they are non-technical, as they are frustrated by the old edits been restored. She wants the man she has married to be reflected on his WikiPedia page. Burtonwj (talk) 20:29, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Should any confirmation be required please email &&&^^^ Burtonwj (talk) 20:31, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- https://infocelebs.com/james-caan-net-worth-dragon-den-wife-and-house/
- https://www.celebsagewiki.com/james-caan-entrepreneur Burtonwj (talk) 20:40, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way that we contact subjects of articles for verification. Content should be verifiable which can be achieved by citing what reliable sources said about the person. These two links wouldn't qualify as reliable sources though. – NJD-DE (talk) 20:46, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- NJD-DE, that article's a puff piece if ever I've seen one. Drmies (talk) 20:48, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Drmies, honestly I only looked at the recent edits so far. Began reading it now, but the more I see the less I wanna continue reading... – NJD-DE (talk) 20:54, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- NJD-DE, that article's a puff piece if ever I've seen one. Drmies (talk) 20:48, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Hi. Unfortunately, it doesn't work that way that we contact subjects of articles for verification. Content should be verifiable which can be achieved by citing what reliable sources said about the person. These two links wouldn't qualify as reliable sources though. – NJD-DE (talk) 20:46, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
I'm about to look at the actual edits, but I had to make a quick stop at User talk:Redrose64: do NOT repost emails unless you have the other person's permission, and do NOT divulge private information like email addresses. And your posting that email in the first place was unwarranted: there is nothing in someone's email that will provide a justification for any Wikipedia edit. It doesn't work that way: information needs to come from reliable secondary sources. If any subject of a BLP has a problem with the content of a Wikipedia article, they can look at WP:BLPKIND and follow the appropriate steps, including contacting the oversight team. Drmies (talk) 20:47, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Why has his recruitment background been removed this is an established fact, even discussed on Dragons Den, his official website, LinkedIn and the many talking engagements he has undertaken ?
https://www.mirror.co.uk/tv/tv-news/former-dragons-den-investors-now-23833848 https://recruitmententrepreneur.com/about/ https://startups.co.uk/dragons-den/james-caan-cbe/ https://hoxomedia.com/podcast/season-4-ep-16-james-caan-cbe/ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamilton_Bradshaw Burtonwj (talk) 21:01, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I'm going to give you credit for scrambling that address; it's all scrubbed from the history now. Here's the thing: the cuts I made are to make this article compliant with WP:BLP. It's pretty obvious you are not a seasoned editor; all the more reason to not take on a job like this. Your links are not acceptable as evidence, the Mirror is not an acceptable source. Whatever is in the article is, better than before, reflected in acceptable sources. Please don't think that arguing over the links you supplied is going to be of any help; you should first read WP:BLP and WP:RS. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- I have emailed the oversight team for assistance Burtonwj (talk) 21:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Agreed I am not a seasoned editor nor did I claim to be and will discuss this with my mentor under the 'no biting newbies' ethos.
- Thank you. Burtonwj (talk) 21:23, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sure thing. But don't play the "newbie" card, since your other edits were back a few years ago. Please don't go around denying that: you were trying to log in on your old account but failed, tried another one, and then created this one. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- You might want to double-check with the person that owns the account. I don't recall using Wikipedia prior to 2021.
- Have a great weekend. Burtonwj (talk) 21:52, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- I did. He denied. But if you don't remember, you probably won't mind that I cleaned up Sybase a little bit. Drmies (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Go for it, I hope tomorrow is a better day for you - let go of the anger Burtonwj (talk) 22:16, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- I did. He denied. But if you don't remember, you probably won't mind that I cleaned up Sybase a little bit. Drmies (talk) 22:13, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- Sure thing. But don't play the "newbie" card, since your other edits were back a few years ago. Please don't go around denying that: you were trying to log in on your old account but failed, tried another one, and then created this one. Drmies (talk) 21:31, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
- OK, I'm going to give you credit for scrambling that address; it's all scrubbed from the history now. Here's the thing: the cuts I made are to make this article compliant with WP:BLP. It's pretty obvious you are not a seasoned editor; all the more reason to not take on a job like this. Your links are not acceptable as evidence, the Mirror is not an acceptable source. Whatever is in the article is, better than before, reflected in acceptable sources. Please don't think that arguing over the links you supplied is going to be of any help; you should first read WP:BLP and WP:RS. Thank you. Drmies (talk) 21:18, 26 June 2021 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Drmies (talk) 23:57, 26 June 2021 (UTC)