118.93.22.58

I have reverted your edit to Matariki because that isn't quite what Pathway of the Birds says, and you have been using this book as a reference in very many articles without engaging in discussion about it. Wikipedia is a community endeavour, and your edits are becoming disruptive even though that is probably not your intention. Please reply to me on this talk page, or at Wikipedia:New Zealand Wikipedians' notice board#How to deal with possible conflict of interest editing by IPs?-gadfium 20:56, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Kia ora gadfium. Thanks for giving directions on how to contact you. Hopefully, I am right that I can enter this conversation simply by editing this message. We'll see!

First up, I am the author of Pathway of the Birds and, as you say, many of my contributions to Wikipedia have been citing this book. This is certainly not true of all my edits, though. I understand from Wikipedia's guidelines that using material I have written or published is OK if it is relevant, but that it should not be excessive. To this end, I have not knowingly contributed anything gratuitous or contentious. My intention has always been to improve the quality of what I find. In view of the anonymity of the process, it might help if I explain that, in the 15 years I have been studying Polynesian culture and natural history, I been frequently frustrated by the contradictions, errors and omissions contained in Wikipedia. However, while researching for Pathway of the Birds, I made an agreement with myself to wait until I had finished before contributing my own corrections. I wanted to be sure of the material I was summarising.

That is, rather than continue to bemoan the shortcomings of what I see as a wonderful community endeavour, I decided to roll my sleeves up and contribute in a field where I know the material well enough from all sides of the debate to give an overview on what is now generally agreed by the scientific community. Much of the misinformation on this topic in Wiki derives from poorly-sourced material or carbon-dating references that are way out of date. Pathway of the Birds, on the other hand, is recent and has been thoroughly peer-reviewed. I am naturally surprised and disappointed to hear that my edits are becoming disruptive, but if so will stop all contributions. It is not as if I don't have other things to do!

With reference to Matariki, the page reference should have been page 161-2, where I show Matariki/Pleiades rising at ENE. If I made a mistake there, I am sorry. It is just that Matariki is topical at the moment and I noticed Te Papa are claiming it is rising in the southeast!118.93.22.58 (talk) 22:51, 18 June 2019 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply. I am currently reading Pathway of the birds, and I am impressed with it.

At Matariki, you added that the Pleiades rises in the NNE, but the book says ENE as you say above. That's why I said "isn't quite [right]" above. There's also a conflict between the article saying the Pleiades rises "just prior to sunrise" and the book saying "an hour after the sun had set: - you didn't edit that part of the article sentence, but it leaves me confused. However, the article is talking about mid-year, and the book is talking of late year, so perhaps that explains the discrepancy in the compass points.

Before you make further edits, I request that you read WP:Conflict of interest. I would suggest that you create an account here, and state that you are the author of Pathway of the birds on the user page, then use that account for your future edits. This is not compulsory, but it makes it easier for other editors to communicate with you, and might reduce the suspicion that your edits coming from multiple IP addresses have caused.

In some articles, eg Suwarrow, you have added your book as a reference, although there is an existing reference which already covers the content. I request that you only add your book when existing references are inadequate, so you are always adding value to the articles rather than giving the impression of promotion.

Other editors will probably also comment on this page. Please take a note of the page name User talk:118.93.22.58 so you can check for further comments even when your IP address changes.-gadfium 04:57, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

Mea culpa gadfium. Thanks for spotting my mistake re the cardinal point of rising of Matariki. It is indeed ENE (and not NNE as I originally wrote on the Wikipedia page). The sunrise/sunset part is OK as it stands and is to do with the time of year. The Suwarrow addition was also mine and was made to give what I thought would be a useful corroboration of 'Best' using a current source that provides further information. I can't see Wikipedia gains (or loses) much by deleting it. I have read WP:Conflict of interest and still think all this talk of COI is out of place, based on a misconception that my motive is to promote myself or my books. The fact is that most Polynesians (the people whose history I am outlining) have no access to libraries or bookshops, even though many will have access to Wikipedia. I'm not expecting anyone to buy the book as a result of finding it mentioned here. This is borne out by the talk page. Looking at this issue of COI, I think it would be more helpful for the project as a whole to assume a generous intention until some evidence emerges that someone is abusing their role as a contributor. On the other hand, when it comes to your correction of fact, I bow to you. You have saved me from an embarrassing mistake! Thank you. 118.93.22.58 (talk) 08:18, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

Fact-checking is a lot of my activity on Wikipedia!

I'm not too worried by the addition of the extra source to Suwarrow. I noticed the addition had been reverted by another editor and thought it best that you avoided raising suspicion of your edits being only for promotion. I think now that you are communicating with us, most of that suspicion has evaporated. Happy editing!-gadfium 09:26, 20 June 2019 (UTC)

---