Fact Checkmater

Welcome!

Some cookies to welcome you!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Fact Checkmater! Thank you for your contributions. I am Darthvaderskywalker2011 and I have been editing Wikipedia for some time, so if you have any questions feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. You can also check out Wikipedia:Questions or type {{help me}} at the bottom of this page. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Introduction
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page
• Help pages
• How to write a great article
• Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community

Also, when you post on talk pages you should sign your name using four tildes (~~~~); that will automatically produce your username and the date. I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Darthvaderskywalker2011 (talk) 17:56, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Crown House Business Centre

The article Crown House Business Centre has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

No real sources for a bog-standard office building. Not an article, a commercial real estate listing.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calton | Talk 11:12, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Fact Checkmater. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Crown House Business Centre, you may have a conflict of interest. People with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, see the conflict of interest guideline and frequently asked questions for organizations. In particular, please:

• avoid editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, its competitors, or projects and products you or they are involved with;
• instead, propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or 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, the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you.Talk 11:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC) Calton | Talk 11:14, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Westgate House

The article Westgate House has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

1) The part of article about the building itself contains no mark of notability. 2) The part of the article about some of the building's tenants has nothing to do with the the building itself.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Calton | Talk 11:22, 5 November 2015 (UTC)

Nomination of Crown House Business Centre for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Crown House Business Centre 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/Crown House Business Centre until a consensus is reached, and anyone 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. Calton | Talk 21:53, 11 November 2015 (UTC)

Re: conflict of interest

However, it appears you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Crown House Business Centre. If so, you have a conflict of interest.

And this based on what, exactly? Aside from the voices inside your head?

--Calton | Talk 15:28, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

POV

In many cases, you improperly deleted material that was properly cited and material to the article on which it appeared. Terrorist groups using charitable organizations to finance activity is real. It is well-documented in reputable sources. The text you deleted was factual reporting.

Bullshit. Have a read of Wikipedia's policies on including irrelevant or out-of-proportion details, on concocting your own theories, on mistaking your personal opinions for reality, and on using Wikipedia as vehicle for promoting your particular form of justice.

Bottom line: if you're looking for a soapbox for your crusade, go start a blog. --Calton | Talk 15:33, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Comment on content, not on the contributor

And yet you commented on me with the utterly made-up evidence-free bullshit about a "conflict of interest".

One could call your notification "hypocrisy", but that would imply its contradictions were unintentional, not a deliberate rhetorical trick. I'd call it a clumsy attempt at dishonest rules-lawyering, myself.

You are dishonest. Your advice is insincere, at best worthless. So it will be, rightfully, ignored. --Calton | Talk 23:26, 20 November 2015 (UTC)

Calton, because your deletions to my content were almost all related to the Crown House, I made an assumption that you were connected to the Crown House. If my assumption was incorrect, then I apologize. Fact Checkmater (talk) 22:15, 23 November 2015 (UTC)