User talk:Legaleagle00

Welcome!

Hello, Legaleagle00, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to take the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or click here to ask for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

Reference errors on 3 June

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

On the Asbestos page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 00:26, 4 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency Act (FACT) Act of 2015 has been accepted

Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency Act (FACT) Act of 2015, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Sulfurboy (talk) 19:45, 9 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act (LARA) of 2015 (September 22)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Onel5969 was:

Until this bill is formally passed (or rejected) it should not be resubmitted. With very small exception, rejected bills are not included on Wikipedia.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act (LARA) of 2015 and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also get Wikipedia's Live Help real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:43, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Legaleagle00, I noticed your article was declined at Articles for Creation, and that can be disappointing. If you are wondering or curious about why your article submission was declined please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Onel5969 ^{TT me} 03:43, 22 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act (LARA) of 2015 has been accepted

Lawsuit Abuse Reduction Act (LARA) of 2015, which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.
The article has been assessed as C-Class, which is recorded on the article's talk page. You may like to take a look at the grading scheme to see how you can improve the article.

You are more than welcome to continue making quality contributions to Wikipedia. Note that because you are a logged-in user, you can create articles yourself, and don't have to post a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for Creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the help desk.
If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider leaving us some feedback.

Thank you for helping improve Wikipedia!

Onel5969 ^{TT me} 15:08, 28 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for October 24

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited In re Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rand and Richard Durbin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:06, 24 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Legaleagle00. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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.

Last but not least: All contributors must not contribute content that violates conflict of interest laws (just as all contributors must respect copyright). The Unfair Commercial Practices Directive is valid throughout the European Union. In a German court decision in 2012 (that also relied on the directive) regarding Wikipedia: "The court held that when a company edits a Wikipedia article, the resulting text falsely creates the impression that the edit has no business-related purpose. By implication, the judges found that the average reader of Wikipedia articles expects to find objective and neutral information." That is a very very important condition, comparable to the FTC Guide" that consumers are likely to believe reflects the opinions, beliefs, findings, or experience of a party other than the sponsoring advertiser”. This expectation by consumers of neutral information on Wikipedia, requires that companies not write "their" WP articles for PR/marketing purposes.

Editors who are compensated for their contributions should make the disclosure by placing the {{connected contributor (paid)}} template at the top of the talk page of affected articles and filling in the parameters. They should also supply this information as part of a list on their user page of all their paid contributions.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing, and autobiographies. Thank you. Tiggerjay (talk) 16:08, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

I think there may be a misunderstanding. I am not a paid contributor and have no financial stake, or any other conflict of interest, in the topics I am writing about. I have not written or edited any articles about myself, people I know, organizations I am a part of, or any possible clients. After reviewing the links you provided me with, I am confident that I do not have a conflict of interest. I decided to edit pages about civil justice because those are topics I have done research into as a legal scholar working at a law school. I have read that editors with specific expertise are often confused with paid contributors/PR people because of the topics they edit. Do you recommend that I explain my motivations/ expertise somewhere on my page (so people do not assume I work for an attorney or lawmaker)?

Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

Best, Legaleagle00 (talk) 17:12, 26 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It might not be a bad idea to put some sort of statement on your user page explaining that you edit legal topics you are familiar with but have no direct connection in. Welcome to Wikipedia. Tiggerjay (talk) 03:49, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally while I believe your edits and contributions to be constructive and positive, take a moment to read WP:SPA as your edits appear to focus almost entirely around asbestos. We welcome your contributions, but I want you to be aware of policies in place to help avoid unnecessary conflict with other editors. Tiggerjay (talk) 15:42, 27 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Legaleagle00, your username is nearly identical to Legal Eagle Inc., "a full-service litigation support provider" (http://www.legaleagleinc.com/about-us.html). Many of your edits appear to take a pro-trial lawyer position, which is a position that would be consistent with the Legal Eagle, Inc. company purpose. You have an extensive edit history with two particular articles that affect trial lawyers, and you seem to conduct additions and deletions that promote a pro-trial lawyer stance: Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency (FACT) Act of 2015 and In re Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC. I agree with Tiggerjay, and am willing to work with you to smooth things out. Let me know if I can help. Xavier Lehtinen (talk) 18:07, 15 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Xavier Lehtinen (talk), Thank you for your recent contributions to the FACT Act page. I appreciate your comments. When I made my wikipedia handle I did not know that there was a legal services corporation with a similar name. The term "legal eagle" is just an old term for a lawyer and is used often. I thought it was a clever name because I work on legal issues. I am not, nor have I ever been a trial lawyer. I have no affiliation with the legal services firm mentioned. I am also not paid by trial lawyers or have any financial gain in the cases I have written about. I just try to write about laws/cases that I am following or researching. It has been suggested that I write a statements to prevent people from thinking that I am a paid editor because of the specific topics I work on. Where would be the most appropriate place to put some sort of disclaimer, explaining that I am not a biased/paid editor? Do you have any other suggestions to prevent this? Thank you, Legaleagle00 (talk)

It's all good. I appreciate you explaining it. Xavier Lehtinen (talk) 18:01, 6 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Disambiguation link notification for January 9

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Furthering Asbestos Claims Transparency (FACT) Act of 2015, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Worksafe. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:10, 9 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Henry Cuellar - age removed?

Hello Legaleagle00, I have restored the age information in this article. As his date of birth seems to be correct and verifiable (per .gov Congress Directory), his age is clearly 60 - I don't really understand why you deleted this detail. If your edit was just a misunderstanding, no problem. Otherwise it would be helpful, if you could discuss your reasoning for the removal on the article's talkpage. Verifiable common encyclopedic information should generally not be removed or hidden from Wikipedia articles. Best regards. GermanJoe (talk) 15:45, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hi GermanJoe! Thank you for checking that and you attention to detail. It was a misunderstanding. I did the math wrong and thought that the auto population function was not working. Legaleagle00 (talk) 16:19, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ok. You got me confused for a moment :) - no problem, it's fixed now. GermanJoe (talk) 16:22, 9 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Legaleagle00. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

ArbCom 2017 election voter message

Hello, Legaleagle00. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]