User talk:Olivermcgee

Welcome!

Hello, Olivermcgee, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using 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 ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! (✉→BWilkins←✎) 00:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Subjects of articles should not be editing them directly. They should discuss proposed edits on the article talkpage, and include valid third party reliable sources and wait for WP:CONSENSUS. Just as a hint: some recent edits by an IP address are horrific - make it look like a resume, and really make the individual look bad. As it is, the subject in the article may not meet our notability standards for an actual encyclopedia - please don't make it worse (✉→BWilkins←✎) 00:38, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

My life is about truth and accuracy. My statement on my page are my life NOT a resume. Most Wiki articles have EDUCATION (I can't publically lie about the truth and sourced facts on this to satisfy Wiki HQ tastes) CAREER (I can't publically lie about the truth and sourced facts on this to satisfy Wiki HQ tastes) and AWARDS (I can't publically lie about the truth and sourced facts on this to satisfy Wiki HQ tastes)! It seems Wiki only wants extensive write-up about bad stuff and controversy to be judged as significant for Wiki HQ tastes. What kind of example are we setting for young people looking at this platform for souces of information (truthful information)! Wiki HQ is encouraging lie and we keep it up tell the truth with sourced facts we block it or delete it off! Good example of integrity for youngsters huh?

Oliver, I've tried to explain on the talk page of the article and tried to offer help, but your ranting all over the wiki has gotten completely out of hand. I have seen a great many people try to explain to you but you have persisted in being disruptive and you are exhausting the patience of the community here. Judging by your rantings, you have no idea how things work here, (Wiki HQ? Never heard of it.) YTake it down about 20 notches and participate in the same way we expect every other editor to participate, with calm discussion. Otherwise, you will end up with no say in the content because no one will work with you. You think you understand how the editing process here works but you don't. This is exactly why we strongly recommend against people editing their own biographies, they lose perspective and can not be objective. Your article isn't being treated any differently than any other, except by you. This would be effortless and simple if you just quit thinking of yourself as a victim here.

"Notability of an award" - At wikipedia, we don't use the word "notability" the same as we would in the real world. When we speak of notability, we are referring to a very specific set of guidelines, starting with WP:N and WP:GNG typically. Those are the general criteria. When we refer to an award being notable or not, the test is fairly simple: If the award has an article here or would likely pass the GNG criteria and have an article here if someone would just write it, then it is "notable" for the purpose of including in a bio. If it wouldn't pass the criteria for inclusion, it is probably not. These are not hard and fast rules, but they are rules of thumb. There are a ton of other policies that govern biographies here. I told you, we are a bit strict on biographies to protect both the individual and the wiki from publishing bad info. I've been here almost 7 years and I learn new stuff every day, you aren't going to master the policies in a day. I can link you 100 different policies pages, and you can spend the next three weeks reading them, or you take advice from people who already know them, and learn them yourself over time. You need to rant less and listen more. Most calm questions are answered quickly, but if you continue to rant, people are just going to ignore you. If you will simply treat people with less skepticism and assume some good faith (Yes, we have a policy on that too) you would find a great deal more help. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 11:25, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"My life is about truth and accuracy. " -- Not remotely. "Wiki HQ" -- there's no such thing. -- Jibal (talk) 21:40, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edits[edit]

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. When you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, 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) 01:33, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

BLP Noticeboard[edit]

Oliver, do you actually understand the purpose of the BLP Noticeboard? It's to attempt to gain sane and community consensus when there is consternation over any article that is a biography of someone who is alive. Wikipedia takes the concerns of people who are subjects of articles very seriously, and as such a) only allows certain things to be noted inside biographical articles, b) requires extremely tight reliable sources, and c) offers multiple ways (including the noticeboard) to obtain resolution of issues. As you should not be editing the content of an article about you whatsoever, the article talkpage and the BLPN are your two best friends here on Wikipedia. Of course, the half-dozen or so of us who are actually trying to both a) protect your article from deletion, and b) help you understand this project are also your friends, but you're doing a darned good job at driving those few people away (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:34, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Note[edit]

Please do not remove the comments of others from an article discussion the way you did at Talk:Oliver McGee. Editors are free to remove any comments on their own talk page, but not other people's comments on any article talk page. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 02:18, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Let me also add this. You really underestimate how willing people are to help you here, but you can't force changes, you have to ask and allow others to assist. There are a lot of rules, which is why it is good to get some help from experienced users. Wikipedia is its own little government, with no leader, truly ran "by the people". It is one of the reasons so many libertarian minded people like myself like it, and in the spirit of volunteerism, donate our time to improving it. To outsiders, it does seem very odd at first, but you would find that most people try to treat everyone the same, and every edit based on its merits. I would personally be happy to work with you on the article, but you have to trust that advice you are given isn't about singling you out, it is about balancing it with the well established policies here, policies designed to protect biographies from either improperly cited criticisms, or undue flattery. Our goal is information, in summary form, that is neutral in presentation. Not a hate page, not a resume, but reliable information that fits a fairly strict criteria. We can help, but only if you let us. Dennis Brown - 2¢ - © - @ - Join WER 02:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This is an extremely mean intimidating unhappy place I am serious thinking about stripping everything associated with my name off this place it is extremely negative experience on my life. I will not recommend to philanthropy and philanthropist to associate their brands or organizations with this platform. It is all about making folks look silly. It makes folks feel bad. And this is not good.

Like I explained on the talk page of the article, Wikipedia isn't a social media site where YOU get to decide what stays and what doesn't, it is a community driven encyclopedia. At Facebook / Myspace / Twitter, YOU have control over the content. It doesn't work that way for an encyclopedia. You are better off to compare Wikipedia to another encyclopedia like Britannica. Would you go to them and demand they print anything in particular? Of course not. You are welcome to have input on the contents of the article, but you don't have any more authority on what is in the article than any random editor, within the limits of our policies. Your instance on comparing Wikipedia to social networking sites is the source of your frustration. Dennis Brown / 2¢ / © / @ / Join WER 13:41, 30 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This can't be the real Oliver McGee[edit]

He surely can't be this stupid. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jibal (talk • contribs) 21:32, 21 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]