User talk:Tertel

February 2014

Hello, I'm Josh3580. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Neal King, with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, I restored the page's content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —Josh3580_talk/hist 19:16, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Excirial. I noticed that you recently removed all content from Neal King, with this edit, without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry, I restored the page's content. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:26, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making nonconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Neal King with this edit. Your edits appear to constitute vandalism and have been reverted or removed. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Administrators have the ability to block users from editing if they repeatedly engage in vandalism. Thank you. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 20:33, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Neal King may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

'''Neal King''' is an [[United States|American]] [[psychologist] who is President of the [[International Association of University Presidents]], and

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 00:15, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

This edit by you suggests that you may have a "conflict of interest" in editing certain articles in Wikipedia. Please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and be very careful when editing articles about yourself or topics that are "close" to you personally or professionally. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:17, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

evidently doing something wrong....

Hi There

I keep trying to remove my page (Neal King) and you and others keep restoring it - and you accused me of vandalism! I confess I'm not a wiki expert and am ignorant of protocol so please allow me to ask in all humility - how do I remove my page?

kind regards. Neal KingTertel (talk) 22:08, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is a few things i should remark on. First and foremost pages are not owned by anyone. It does not matter if you are the subject of the article or the person that wrote it: Any content added to Wikipedia is irrevocable licensed as both CC-BY-SA and a GFDL license and cannot simply be removed once added. Blanking a page by removing all content from it will not remove the page either - the article content will still be present in the page history.

It is possible to actually delete a page, but doing so requires administrative privileges, and (Not counting a few exceptions) most times results in a deletion discussion that determines if the page should be removed. Since any page i would be pointing you to will probably contain a large amount of text explaining how to delete a page it might be convenient to ask: Why do you believe that the page should be removed? Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 22:47, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

it's very helpful - this page was set up by staff some years ago when I was president at Antioch Los Angeles - to be used as a part of our university PR

I have recently retired and living a quieter life without the need for PR - so thought that the page had served its purpose

does it simply, instead, live in perpetuity?

thanks again

Neal King Tertel (talk) 22:52, 11 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Normally a page will remain in place unless someone brings it up in a deletion discussion or tag it for removal stating a valid reason as to why the page should be removed. If there is no real reason to remove a page it will indeed live on in perpetuity. There are some exceptions to this rule though - people who are relatively low profile have requested that a page on them would be removed. While it is not a bright line rule such requests have been honored in the past, even though the person in question would have passed the criteria for inclusion otherwise.

In this instance a request for removal on this grounds may be challenging since you have held a position of eminence (That might be considered an indication that the article is high profile instead). The best advice i can offer if you really wish to remove the page, is to list it on article for deletion, requesting a removal on the grounds that you would prefer not to have a page. It is not a guarantee that the page will actually be removed, but it is likely the best option around. Excirial^{(Contact me,Contribs)} 21:26, 13 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Neal King shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. See BRD for how this is done. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Bbb23 (talk) 20:56, 17 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Neal King

Your edit here definitely improves the page on Neal King but do you have any sources from which you pulled this information from? Thanks! Meatsgains (talk) 05:40, 20 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

April 2015

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you add unsourced material to Wikipedia, as you did at Neal King. Bbb23 (talk) 23:28, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You need to stop editing the article completely. Assuming you are indeed the subject, your conflict of interest is patently obvious. The only thing you do at Wikipedia is to edit that article, alternating between trying to "remove" it and adding unsourced information or promotional material. You simply need to stop because I see no benefit you're adding to this project by your edits. If you persist, you risk being blocked indefinitely. This sentence you added in your recent edit was wholly inappropriate: "Dr. King's perspective on this period of time can be found here [1]." You don't add bare URLs to an article, and you don't add unreliable sources like this one. Saying you are a novice at Wikipedia does not excuse the disruption you're causing at the article. If I thought you wanted to benefit the encyclopedia by editing articles other than the King article, I might be willing to assist you in learning more about how to edit here, but giving the circumstances, that would be a waste of my time.--Bbb23 (talk) 23:54, 20 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Please keep this discussion here, not on my Talk page. I'm watching your page, so I'll see if you edit it. It doesn't matter to me what you say you're trying to do. What matters is what you do do. As for your question about me, I don't see that it's relevant. Unlike you, I have no personal interest in the King article. I don't know him (you?) or anything about him other than what it says in the article. As for my role at Wikipedia, I'm a very experienced editor and an administrator.--Bbb23 (talk) 00:24, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

thanks for the dialogue - I see clearly how our (a couple of us sign on as "tertel") complete ignorance of Wiki protocols and conventions has caused a number of problems -- and apologize. I was involved in setting up the page as part of our PR campaign when Dr. King was president at Antioch LA. I was also involved in trying to take it down when folks who lost their power struggle at Sofia U (BattleCrow et al) took to all available media to disparage King - only to learn that the page is not ours to take down. (Wiki admin intervened in what they called an "edit war") Since then, our (admittedly clumsy) efforts have been to keep it current and balanced (for example, King has not been president of IAUP for nearly a year but does currently chair its board - an update which you disallowed). I guess the best path forward is simply to leave it alone and let it age as it will? As for editing other Wiki pages - had never occurred to me! Tertel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tertel (talk • contribs) 12:14, 21 April 2015 Tertel (talk) 19:07, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The fact that two of you use the account explains some of the differences in the styles of the comments. By the way, two people using the same account is not allowed on Wikipedia. See WP:ROLE. However, if you "behave" and stop disrupting the article, I'm not going to block the account on that basis. Leaving the article alone is certainly an option and less work for me and for others. However, I don't have a problem with altering material in the article if it is no longer accurate, as opposed to adding brand new material, which is a different issue. If you want to try that, here's what you do. You open a topic on the King Talk page (click "New section" at the top of the Talk page). You write out the exact language you want to add (or change) and where in the article it's supposed to go. And you provide the sources that support your proposed changes by way of links (not refs on the Talk page). The way you create such a link is to enclose the URL of the source in single square brackets.--Bbb23 (talk) 19:31, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion (but never when editing articles), please be sure to sign your posts. There are two ways to do this. Either:

Add four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment; or
With the cursor positioned at the end of your comment, click on the signature button ( or ) located above the edit window.

This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is necessary to allow other editors to easily see who wrote what and when.

Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 18:46, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I just want to bump this again to bring it to your attention. Signing you posts does not mean typing your name after it, it means on any page that is a talk page (including this one), your posts must end in ~~~~. Please remember to put this at the end of all talk page posts and replies. This will automatically add your username and the date&time to the end of your post. Thanks! EoRdE6^{(Come Talk to Me!)} 18:55, 21 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

update - at the beginning

Dr. Neal King is an American Consultant, Educator and Psychologist who is President Emeritus and Chair of the Board of Directors of the International Association of University Presidents.[www.iaup.org] He is the former president of Antioch University Los Angeles and Sofia University USA in Palo Alto, CA. Tertel (talk) 16:36, 22 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]