Talk:Edward J. Walsh (journalist)

	Chicago portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.ChicagoWikipedia:WikiProject ChicagoTemplate:WikiProject ChicagoChicago
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Biography

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography

Journalism Low‑importance

	Journalism portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Oregon Start‑class Low‑importance

	Oregon portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Oregon, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of Oregon on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.OregonWikipedia:WikiProject OregonTemplate:WikiProject OregonOregon
Start	This article has been given a rating which conflicts with the project-independent quality rating in the banner shell. Please resolve this conflict if possible.
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
The current collaborations of the month are Women's History Month: Create or improve articles for women listed at Oregon Women of Achievement (modern) or Women of the West, Oregon chapter (historical).

The following Wikipedia contributor has declared a personal or professional connection to the subject of this article. Relevant policies and guidelines may include conflict of interest, autobiography, and neutral point of view.

Spinfisher (talk · contribs) / Edward J. Walsh Edward J. Walsh This user has declared a connection. (COI declaared here)

Individuals with a conflict of interest, particularly those representing the subject of the article, are strongly advised not to directly edit the article. See Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. You may request corrections or suggest content here on the Talk page for independent editors to review, or contact us if the issue is urgent.

Not COI

An editor, AussieLegend, has been asked to stop this COI assertion. There is no basis for the claim on the page Edward J. Walsh. The above COI tag does not match the definition of COI for Wikipedia. For instance, a close connection may be apparent, but an actual conflict must be documented. It is not enough to say, as this editor has, that a relationship may exist. He/she must provide actual evidence that edits are made to advance the personal interests of the editor. This editor has not done so and my edits have not done so. Furthermore, there is no evidence that my editing has affected the neutral point of view for this article.

Inclusion of the COI tag appears to be used, therefore, in a punitive fashion which violates Wikipedia values. This editor's actions are, furthermore, not appropriate for COI issues, unless he/she intends to ask another administrator to review his/her claims of a COI. This is beginning to look like an inappropriate edit war due to this editor's actions.

I will leave the COI for now due to my desire to always consider Administrator and editor actions from a goodfaith perspective even though this editor's behavior suggests otherwise.

✉ Spinfisher 18:20, 31 March 2014 (UTC) spinfisher[reply]

As you are clearly related to the subject of the article, there is a concern over your edits. Evidence of your relationship is in the summaries of the now deleted files that you have uploaded, which attribute the source of the image to your mother's house, along with a licensing exclamation that the image copyright belongs to "the family" and the implication that you are part of the family. There is always concern when a close relative of a subject edits the article, which is why we discourage such actions. --AussieLegend (✉) 06:26, 10 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

More than concern needed

Spinfisher (talk) 23:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC) AussieLegend[reply]

There has to be more than "concern" due to a person's relation. There has to be actual evidence that bias exists. You have not shown this, and you cannot show this. Therefor you are acting in an irresponsible manner for an editor including violating several core principles of the Wikipedia project. This is unfortunate and immature. However, in the interest of the project, you may continue in your unhelpful efforts unimpeded for now. Spinfisher 21:23, 18 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

COI Not Substantiated; Please Remove COI Maintenance Tag

(talk) 23:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC) AussieLegend[reply]

The COI is resolved from my perspective and you have offered no evidence to substantiate the concern that a conflict of interest (be being a relation) has any affect on the page. This page was not created by me; rather it was created by a user unrelated to the family. My edits have been basic factual fixes, attempts at adding a photograph and references (which I made mistakes on, being a new editor). My interest in editing was to correct some factual problems after the original user created the page. My interest, therefore, was to advance the aims of Wikipedia and not myself, my family, or any outside interests. Therefore, there is no actual concern related to a conflict of interest. For future edits, should I find them necessary, I will seek another editor or a community member to make the edits and justify that on the talk page. The current COI tag is unnecessary and modestly inflammatory at this point and I request, once again, that it be removed. I believe at this point I have made enough requests and shown that this COI is resolved that I am justified in seeking third party review of this issue. --Spinfisher (talk) 23:36, 20 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Since you are the target of the COI tag, your satisfaction that the issue is resolved is irrelevant. The tag has been placed and another editor now needs to review the article in order for the tag to be removed. As I was the one who placed the tag, it would be inappropriate to remove it. You've made a number of edits that are of concern, which is how I reached the article in the first place. Coming back here to complain periodically and/or to remove the tag is not helpful. --AussieLegend (✉) 01:53, 21 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Whether you think it is helpful for me to return here or not is also irrelevant. I come back here due to your obstinacy in this rather minor matter. That is, you still have not engaged in the actual issue at hand which is my challenge of your "concern." You may have a concern, but that is not enough. You have to at least name the concern (and it has to be more than "you are related"). I mentioned in my previous note that as a new editor I made some editing errors. I realize those errors and have notified you how I intend to prevent that from happening again. Since none of the remaining text is a problem, therefore, the issue seems to be resolved. So, I am merely pointing out that you have not substantiated your concern and even if one stretched the case for concern, I have adequately addressed it. You may be a good editor and a fine example of a Wikipedia community member, but it is possible for you to make a mistake and/or allow your emotions to get the better of you as I suggest is happening here. Your behavior also appears to be one from a position of bias and bullying which is antithetical to the Wiki project. Kindly, then, please either remove the COI or please have another, unbiased editor review this page as soon as possible and render a judgment. As a new editor, I am rather appalled at your lack of empathy, understanding, and your Draconian approach. Spinfisher (talk) Spinfisher (talk) 22:44, 23 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have quite clearly stated that, as the child of the subject of the article, you have made edits that raise COI concerns. I did this as recently as 3 days ago right here. Concerns about your edits have been explained in edit summaries and you have been warned on your talk page. I have explained to you that somebody else needs to come to the page to assess the article, so returning to complain about the tag achieves absolutely nothing. There's nothing I can do unless I revert all your changes. This includes restoring citations that you inexplicably removed in favour of another source, which is yet another of the problems. It's not a case of me "thinking" that you returning here and starting a new discussion periodically is unhelpful, it actually is unhelpful. --AussieLegend (✉) 03:35, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You have stated, but not substantiated. You have stated that I am a child of the subject. As a veteran, you should know that is not enough -- that is, you need to have some actual evidence that the conflict of interest has caused editing in contravention of the Project's values. You have not done this. Instead, you have presented a non sequitur as the basis for your assertions. Since these assertions do not follow from any actual evidence, besides evidence of me being related (which is, first, quite obvious and second, not enough to assert COI concerns), you are causing unnecessary aggravation while violating the ethics of this Project. As a supposed seasoned editor for the Project, you should know better. The simple solution is for you to remove the COI and move on. Or, have someone else review your work. Eventually I myself will have your work and judgment reviewed by someone from the Project. Spinfisher (talk) 21:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

COI tag on article

I came here from WP:COIN. I reviewed the article and it is fine from an NPOV and sourcing perspective right now. So I have removed it. The artice is on my watchlist now. Jytdog (talk) 15:15, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disclosure

Spinfisher Spinfisher is the son of the subject of this page. — Preceding undated comment added by Spinfisher (talk) 20:49, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much making the disclosure. Jytdog (talk) 21:12, 13 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]