User talk:Lmwolman

August 2014

Hello, I'm ViperSnake151. I noticed that you made an edit concerning content related to a living (or recently deceased) person, but you didn’t support your changes with a citation to a reliable source, so I removed it. Wikipedia has a strict policy concerning how we write about living people, so please help us keep such articles accurate. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 03:33, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

Please do not add unreferenced or poorly referenced information, especially if controversial, to articles or any other page on Wikipedia about living (or recently deceased) persons, as you did to Bill Daly. Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 21:39, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your addition to Bill Daly has been removed, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted text, or images borrowed from other websites, or printed material without a verifiable license; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing. ViperSnake151 Talk 21:40, 15 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I have reverted your edit to Wikipedia:Help desk, partly because that is not the place for a proposed draft of article contents, but more significantly because it was a copyright violation from http://www.sportslaw.org/conference/conference2014/speakers/daly.pdf . You were warned above about copyright violation, and further violations would be likely to result in your being blocked from editing. If you wish to propose revised wording for the article, in your own words, the place to do it is on the article talk page, supporting it by references to published reliable sources independent of the subject. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:40, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Lmwolman. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations.

The problem is that everything in that version you keep introducing is not in the correct style and presentation that we use on Wikipedia. Everything, especially on biographies of living persons, must be citied to reliable, third-party, secondary sources. It also blatantly sounds like PR material ... because it is.

Please be forewarned that such disregard for core policies may lead to a loss of editing privileges. ViperSnake151 Talk 15:33, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. ViperSnake151 Talk 15:39, 17 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

September 2014

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for PR-ing, serial copyviolating, lack of communication. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 02:36, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Lmwolman, I have unblocked you after a request at WP:ANI. I urge you to do two things. First, don't copy and paste that stuff in here again--that should be clear. If you do it again, chances are you'll be blocked indefinitely. Second, please try and be more communicative. Your attempts at communication have all been accompanied by the posting of that same material--please talk to your fellow editors. Weighing in at that ANI discussion would be a good place to begin. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 18:37, 18 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]