Caroline456

Caroline456, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Caroline456! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like I JethroBT (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 13:55, 25 March 2018 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello, Caroline456, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

• Introduction and Getting started
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article
• Simplified Manual of Style

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 , and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!

March 2018

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding living or recently deceased people, and edits relating to the subject (living or recently deceased) of such biographical articles, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

Hello, Caroline456. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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, company, organization or competitors;
• propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
• disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
• 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 must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Hi Caroline. In addition to reading the above warnings I suggest you read about the BRD process, which is a common way to resolve disputes. Once you're reverted, rather than re-reverting, the best practice is to discuss the changes you wish to see on the article talk page. Repeated re-reverting is often seen as edit warring and can result in administrative sanctions (such as being blocked from editing). --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:22, 27 March 2018 (UTC)

Can you please tell me where you got the information about Compass Care in this edit? It's not in the cited source, so where did it come from? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 22:32, 28 March 2018 (UTC)

I believe that we have cited it before in the article. Here is one of them http://argusleader.newspapers.com/image/243411022/?terms=Paul%2BErickson

Photographs

You personally took photographs of both Paul Erickson and Maria Butina? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:46, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

The pictures that I use meet all required criteria of Wikipedia rules. Caroline456 (talk) 17:52, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

You didn't answer my question. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 17:54, 30 March 2018 (UTC)

You might be busy this weekend. Just letting you know I'll take further action in a couple of days if I don't get a meaningful answer from you. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:44, 31 March 2018 (UTC)

Dr. Fleischman, why are you harassing me? I am a new user of Wikipedia that as well as you do completely volunteerly spends time on editing pages. While it's all very fun, it is becoming very unpleasant and stressful for me to continue doing so.

No, I did not is the answer to your question.

And please stop this deconstructive harassment. I admire Wikipedia community, and would like to work on many things here. My primary interest is way far from the subject we are discussing right now, and I would very much like to have a consensus here, and switch my attention to a new topic that I am really fascinated about.

I appreciate. Caroline456 (talk) 13:40, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Can you please remove the Erickson and Butina photos then? They appear to be copyright violations. —Dr. Fleischman (talk) 15:09, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

yes, I can. I requested the deletion of Erickson's pictures.

And I lost Butina's page as well as the uploaded photo somewhere. How can I access the page now?

Caroline456 (talk) 16:10, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. Here's Butina's photo. How did you get these photos? They don't appear on the Internet. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:27, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Nominated to be deleted. Some of them are available on social networks. Others I got from my sources for the piece I was writing about these characters. Why? Caroline456 (talk) 15:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Because I continue to have concerns about a possible conflict of interest. You certainly don't write like an independent journalist. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:31, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

First, I never talked that I am "an independent journalist". I said I wrote about it. Please do not restate my words. Not only journalists write, as you may know)) Caroline456 (talk) 16:48, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I assumed too much. So what sort of piece are you writing, if you don't mind me asking? --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:57, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Accepted. It's a descriptive opus, so to speak, for whom it might concern. It was not intended to be published anyway. Caroline456 (talk) 17:03, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Maybe you shouldn't be sharing your research findings with the entire world if they're intended for a private audience? --Dr. Fleischman (talk)

It's so charming that you worry of me so much. I have not had someone to do that for year and decades))). I can pretty much decide what I can and cannot share with public. Caroline456 (talk) 17:13, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

I'm sure you haven't even BEGUN to have people worry of you here yet. You're not being cooperative, you're not allowing yourself to be bullied, you uploaded images that according to Doc here "aren't on the internet" and you're not responding "appropriately" to interrogation. And you don't even "write like an independent journalist". So I'm sure that plenty of people have worry of you. If you take a look at the bottom of your talk page here during an edit you'll see that your talk page is a member of "2 hidden categories". Ohhh. Spooky. Wikipedia is a labyrinth and a house of mirrors. Just remember you can easily kick down these walls and shatter these mirrors and nothing "hidden" here is hidden well. Or forever. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.234.100.169 (talk) 04:56, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

The two hidden categories are category:Wikipedians who have received a Teahouse invitation and category:User talk pages with conflict of interest notices. Yeah, spooky indeed. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:27, 25 July 2018 (UTC)

If they don't appear on the internet how did they get here? And who or what has the ability to search the entire internet? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.234.100.169 (talk) 04:50, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

Potential conflict of interest with Maria Butina and Paul Erickson

Caroline, I'm sorry you feel harassed, and I'm glad you've decided to start contributing to Wikipedia, but I must say I'm becoming more and more concerned that you likely have a very close relationship with Paul Erickson and an even closer relationship with Maria Butina. Can you please convince me otherwise? This is not meant to badger you but to make sure you comply with our community guidelines on conflicts of interest. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 16:22, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Can you explain how something you fear may exist like a "very close relationship" with those two individuals, that at the moment is entirely in your head, is a "conflict of interest" for the person you're harassing about it because it MAY exist but your own obsession with it is NOT a conflict of interest in your continuing to harass the person who may or may not have a "very close relationship" with two individuals that are apparently of a great deal of interest to YOU? You're worried about "community guidelines"? How about assuming good faith? How about don't bite the newcomers? How about minding your own business and not "suggesting" that someone you're only harassing because YOU have a problem with that individual's "very likely" very close relationships with those individual find "something else" to work at Wikipedia? I think YOU'RE the one that should find something else to do besides harass people. Like figure out a way that clicking on Paul Erickson links to whichever SPECIFIC Paul Erickson it is you're so concerned about Caroline456's very likely, very close relationship to. Do "editors" like you who just blatantly abuse people ever worry about offending/threatening/harassing somebody with the "power" to respond personally? I mean in the "real world"? Being a creepy, obsessive, mean, excessively "curious" and just play WEIRD "editor" on Wikipedia might not be the best way to "make friends" and "influence people" and some folks take exception to having their friends and loved ones abused and harassed and interrogated by strangers PERIOD. Even online. Some of them ESPECIALLY online. I suggest you find better things to do with your "free time" and "internet access", providing they're actually your's and there isn't some job you're supposed to be doing and somebody else's "resources" you're using when you're playing "detective" on Wikipedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.234.100.169 (talk) 05:10, 15 April 2018 (UTC)

DrFleischman, I do not have any close relations with any of this characters, but I have had a chance to write about this story earlier. The latter is my only interest. I honestly did not expect this to be such a battle that would take so much of my time. As I mentioned earlier, I this not my primary interest of life, so I would be more than happy to reach some consensus on Erickson and move on. As you know, I am sure, there is no way how anyone could prove that there is no connection unless disclosing personal information which is not allowed by Wikipedia, as I've learned. In fact, it's opposite what our Constitution states in the Presumption of Innocence. So, you are free, for sure, to claim whatever you want and ban me from editing Wikipedia, so this great project would just lose one more author. Not a big deal, I guess, but I do not think that this is the incentive. Being related to some other decentralized systems projects (which IS my primary interest), I, again, admire Wiki and would like to be a contributor. Caroline456 (talk) 16:33, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I'd suggest you find other subject matter to contribute to on Wikipedia then. --Dr. Fleischman (talk) 18:05, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

I will be doing other stuff here, however, I've done a lot on this one and would like my contribution to stay. Abandoning this page would not be pleasant for me, it's like abandoning a baby - I've spent a lot of time and added some important things to the piece. Leaving things unfinished is not my style. I believe that we (you and me, as well as other authors) can find a common ground to have a neutral article on this subject. Caroline456 (talk) 18:11, 2 April 2018 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi Caroline456! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. I’m inviting you to join other people who edit conservatism-related articles at WikiProject Conservatism! A friendly and fun place where group members can ask questions and meet new colleagues. You'll also discover DYK: the easiest and funnest way to get your article on the Main Page. I hope to see you there! – Lionel^(talk) 06:43, 12 April 2018 (UTC)

You're in TV

See [1]. --Kuebi (talk) 12:10, 25 July 2018 (UTC)