User talk:Sh fom

Steven Hassan article

Please see the MOS:DR section of the MOS:BIOGRAPHY guideline on why, however much Steven Hassan has PhD and doctoral qualifications, that is not mentioned everywhere in the article. For that reason your recent additions to that article will be removed. Tx. --Francis Schonken (talk) 15:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

COI?

Hello, Sh fom. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Steven Hassan, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. --Francis Schonken (talk) 16:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

hello sir, apologies for the late reply. i am not advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything. I can try to get on a quick call and clarify all the points that you stated above. let me know how to resolve this. Thank you. Sh fom (talk) 04:43, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir, waiting for your reply. let me know if you need further clarification. Thank you Sh fom (talk) 05:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

October 2021

Hello Sh fom. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Steven Hassan, 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:Sh fom. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sh fom|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. Longhair\^talk 20:32, 4 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir, apologies for the late reply. There is nothing paid for editing the page. Let me know if you want to discuss this quickly over the call for more clarity. Sh fom (talk) 11:52, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Dear sir, waiting for your reply. let me know if you need further clarification. Sh fom (talk) 05:48, 21 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of Interest

Sh fom you should address the above issues before continuing to edit the Steven Hassan page. Harold the Sheep (talk) 06:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

There is nothing paid for editing the page. Let me know if you want to discuss this quickly over the call for more clarity. Sh fom (talk) 09:58, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sh fom, you have a clear conflict of interest and should not edit the Steven Hassan article. Read the section on your talk page above entitled COI?. It would be a good idea to familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's policies on conflict of interest that are referred to there. For a brief summary see WP:PSCOI. You should also read WP:SHAREDACCOUNT. Harold the Sheep (talk) 22:16, 19 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sir, I responded to your previous point. This is new point that you brought now. I responded to that as well. Let us work collaboratively and help each other as a good member of wikipedia community. I dont have any conflict of interest. That is the reason I am requesting you to please get on a call with me so that i can explain you point by point. In addition, i read both the articles WP:PSCOI. and WP:SHAREDACCOUNT., there seems to be nothing that i am not following as per the wikipedia guidelines. Let me know if you have further questions Sh fom (talk) 04:49, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You said yourself that you are a member of Steven Hassan's 'team', and that your edits to the page were based on his input. That is a very obvious conflict of interest, and it seems extraordinary to me that you can have read those policies and still say "I don't have any conflict of interest". It is not necessary or appropriate to ask other users to "get on a call" with you. What you need to do is familiarise yourself with Wikipedia's core policies and guidelines, particularly those relating to Conflict of Interest (COI) and Neutral Point of View (NPOV), and edit (or not edit) according to them. Harold the Sheep (talk) 05:53, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sir, please understand, i am not a member of his team. i clearly state that now. when i am no longer a member of his team then it should suffice. i have clarified it now. Please accept this as final statement from my end,

I request you to please not keep moving the goal post. let us work in a good spirit and colloborate as a good community members. Hope this helps. Sh fom (talk) 10:58, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The reason for asking to get on a call is to avoid this long discussion thread and sort it amicably and avoid all these misunderstanding, hence it is always better to discuss in good faith, positively and help each other. Therefore, in my view, getting on a call and discussing the matter can help and save time. Thanks Sh fom (talk) 11:04, 20 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sh fom, the very first edit you made to the Steven Hassan article had the edit summary "incorrect URL for my web site". [1] How exactly was it 'your website' if you have no connection with Hassan? AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:32, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

sir, all the recent edits and reverts are done by this user. i think multiple edits in one go might from this user could have messed this. Feel free to remove it.

https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/User:Harold_the_Sheep

I am fully here to support and work together if you need any further assistance on this matter. Let us work together to resolve this. Sh fom (talk) 15:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Please answer the question I asked above. AndyTheGrump (talk) 15:44, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

i just checked the edit and saw the exact changes for which this comment was made. The url was changed from

website = www.freedomofmind.com

to

| website = freedomofmind.com

And hence the comment "incorrect URL for my web site" against it , Let me know if i misunderstood something. Do you want to discuss it on a quick call? That would help to sort this quickly. if not above, state the edit date from version history and which date was it Sh fom (talk) 16:08, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

From

{URL|http://www.freedomofmind.com/}}

to

website = freedomofmind.com

Do you see the difference? Sh fom (talk) 16:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

What I see here is a refusal to answer the question I asked. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:12, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

September 2023

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Steven Hassan) for editing with a conflict of interest contrary to Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:16, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Since you continue to deny your conflict of interest despite having admitted that you are part of "Hassan's team", and your account is only being used to remove criticism from Hassan's biography, you are now blocked from editing the page. You can request edits using the article's talk page. If you are being paid to edit, you are required to disclose your employment relationship; see the instructions at WP:PAID. You are required to disclose this now, before you make any further edits. If you fail to do so you will be blocked from editing entirely, per Wikipedia's Terms of Use. And no, nobody is going to call you to discuss any of this.

I also must warn you that using a second account to avoid sanctions is strictly forbidden. If you are found to be abusing multiple accounts, all of your accounts will be blocked. Thank you. Ivanvector (^Talk/_Edits) 16:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sh fom, I've again reverted your report at WP:ANEW. If you disrupt that noticeboard again, I will convert your partial block to a sitewide block.--Bbb23 (talk) 16:29, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
i think i clearly stated i am not from his team. But looks like you all are purposely not accepting what i clearly told on Harold the Sheep page. If you believe my one statement and dont believe other statement, actually this appears to be very biased and partial. I clearly state one more time; I am not from Hassan's Team and Not paid for anything, if you have proof, please present it and prove it and i will surely accept forever block
This is not fair dealing. I think that is why you all are removing my Edit warring notice also multiple times. Are you all from the same team and supporting that one user Harold the Sheep and since i raised Edit warring report against him, then suddenly Ivanvector appeared on the scene. This is a clear case of groupism and trying to suppress other user without giving fair chance.
- Whatever i reverted i gave proper edit reason, may i know what was wrong with that edit?
- Why was my queries to Harold the Sheep not responded ?
- Why was my edit warring request repeatedly removed?
- Why suddenly the user Ivanvector appeared on the scene after i raised edit warring and is doing the same thing as Harold the Sheep and then suddenly blocking me.
I think these are obviously biased action and misuse of power. Sh fom (talk) 16:45, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Sh fom (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here Sh fom (talk) 17:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

As per below. Additionally, if you ever make another unblock request, please read and thoroughly understand WP:GAB. Your reason for contesting your block must go inside the unblock request. Yamla (talk) 17:42, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

* Whenever my edits were reverted by any user especially User: Harold the sheep and others, i have followed proper procedure and tried initiating a polite conversation on their respective talk page. please feel free to verify

I have responded to all their queries raised by the users on the talk page and responded promptly
Even when users have not answered to any of our queries, i have politely followed up with them
Whatever reverts i made, i did ask for proper source for those statements?
Whenever i have not received proper reply from the user after repeated follow up, i politely raised my request on Edit Warring page.
I am not from Hassan's team and i don't have any conflict of interest and neither being paid anything. There is some misunderstanding created on this point.

Nonetheless, based on above points, i feel that the block is no longer necessary because i have understood what i am blocked for, i will not do it again, and i will make productive contributions instead. In fact,all my dealing have been very polite and i will continue to keep it the same going forward as well. So based on above points kindly consider my appeal. Thank you Sh fom (talk) 17:01, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

How about giving a clear, direct, and unequivocal explanation as to why, in your first edit to the Hassan article (linked here [2]), your edit summary read "incorrect URL for my web site"". Because without such an explanation, any reasonable person could only either conclude that (a) you are Hassan, or someone working on his behalf, or (b) that the edit summary was false, and you were impersonating Hassan. There appear to be no other reasonable explanations for the use of the word 'my' in the edit summary. AndyTheGrump (talk) 17:10, 22 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

ok sir. let me explain this for one last time. sir, first of thank you to all the people who have taken interest in this case, but honestly i think all these are purposely blown out of proportion or just a way to implicate or create a case by all these manipulative tactics, otherwise

why would you dig a edit of several years ago (2020) and try to suddenly ask questions about it?, what is the intention if not to implicate or build a case out of it or to support or protect the user Harold the sheep . Isn't it very obvious?
Else whatever i reported against him would have been neutrally investigated. isn't it?
There are multiple violations or mistakes by the user Harold the sheep, but why none was considered or properly investigated?, sir please honestly think isn't this obvious case of prejudice? where is the neutrality in all these?
In addition, just see your last reply, it was exactly beneath my appeal request, sir please be honest what is the intention here? why suddenly you posted your message beneath my appeal and not to discussion thread where we conversing

Sir, honestly and neutrally think isn't this obviously looking one sided action to protect the user Harold the sheep

Three times i said (on HAROLD THE SHeep's talk page, to Iamvector's reply, and again here)

I am NOT from Hassan's Team

only once there was a typo

I am from Hassan's Team

which i deleted already and you guys are only taking that as a reference. Doesn't that look strange, fully motivated and purposeful cornering and trying to build a case. sir, my only request is to be fair and don't act one sided.

Moroever, why was my below questions not answered?, what is the reason for that?

Whatever i reverted i gave proper edit reason, may i know what was wrong with that edit?
Why was my queries to Harold the Sheep not responded ?
Why was my edit warring request repeatedly removed? First no reason was given for revert, then later the edit reason was posted request was mangled and not structured, but later when i structured it properly, it was reverted again and i was partially blocked.
Why suddenly the user Ivanvector appeared on the scene after i raised edit warring and is doing the same thing as Harold the Sheep and then suddenly blocking me without any warning or explanation?
Why no action taken against Harold the Sheep for his violation of policy which is making multiple edits in less than 24 hours, which is a clear violation? For his voilation of giving wrong reference and still he is able to revert other's edit without any clear explanation, which is again a clear violation? why is he being protected?
Why is no response given to me for repeated removing the edit warring request against Harold the sheep?

It would be great if those involved in the review process can have a look at above question and consider replying to my queries and not being one sided.

All i expect is a fair review. Thank you!! Sh fom (talk) 04:35, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I note that once again you have entirely failed to answer the simple question I asked above. Why did you use the words "my web site" in the edit summary I linked? AndyTheGrump (talk) 05:10, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

To add to that, I note that in another edit summary, you wrote "cited reference has an error. I am not a clinical psychologist. I removed it." [3] What is your explanation? AndyTheGrump (talk) 06:22, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Now you seem to be admitting that you are him- so why did you deny it? 331dot (talk) 19:36, 25 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Just for reference for the people reading: In WP:COIN this user User:Sh fom says "I am Steven Hassan and my page has been significantly altered by cult propagandists.[...]" Hiko (talk) 18:38, 29 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]