User talk:Ggitzen

I was wondering what you are talking about with regard to 'censorship with pixelated text. I have seen the scene on the Blu-ray release and there is No Text in the final scene. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siccoyote (talk • contribs) 23:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Ggitzen. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article New Albion, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. You could ask at WP:RSN if your book can be considered a reliable source but you'd still need to get agreement on the talk page to include it. And you can ask there about other sources. But you've got an obvious conflict of interest and shouldn't be adding it yourself. Dougweller (talk) 18:01, 9 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Mediation Committee has received a request for formal mediation of the dispute relating to "My Edits were removed from the Francis Drake and Nova Albion page". As an editor concerned in this dispute, you are invited to participate in the mediation. Mediation is a voluntary process which resolves a dispute over article content by facilitation, consensus-building, and compromise among the involved editors. After reviewing the request page, the formal mediation policy, and the guide to formal mediation, please indicate in the "party agreement" section whether you agree to participate. Because requests must be responded to by the Mediation Committee within seven days, please respond to the request by 23 June 2015. 

The request for formal mediation concerning My Edits were removed from the Francis Drake and Nova Albion page, to which you were listed as a party, has been declined. To read an explanation by the Mediation Committee for the rejection of this request, see the mediation request page, which will be deleted by an administrator after a reasonable time. Please direct questions relating to this request to the Chairman of the Committee, or to the mailing list. For more information on forms of dispute resolution, other than formal mediation, that are available, see Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. 

I appears that neither of the other parties who were instrumental of removing my NPOV original edits, of less than 1700 words on the 2 pages in question, have agreed to mediation demonstrates their inability to either defend their positions or they are the ones who have a conflict of interests. (MikeVdP (talk · contribs) is the President of the Drake Navigators Guild who has a definite conflict of interest in placing their theories ahead of any other. There has never been an agreement among scholars, yet, where Drake landed. The Nova Albion site, by including other theorized sites, demonstrates that the site has never been established. Therefore, why are my edits removed while others were not when I have a greater following because of my new groundbreaking research than any of the other theorized sites. At the very very least the entire Nova Albion page should begin with theorized sites and let all sites be displayed rather then designate my years of legitimate research as "Fringe". As a side bar to this conversation but it shows the faux history which the Drake Navigators Guild are permitted to develop is on the Nova Albion page section - "Officially recognized site – National Historic Landmark[edit] Drakes Bay The site of Drake's landing officially recognized by the U.S. Department of the Interior and other bodies is Drake's Cove, in Drakes Bay." is a total fabrication by the Guild. Their former Edward Von der Porten, father of MikeVdP, was interviewed in on the SF newspapers and said the similar statement. Then it shows on Wikipedia Nova Albion. The fact is, I have written a manuscript which documents the process which the park designated it a historic landmark which: 1. never mentions Francis Drake. 2. It was approved for reason of international relations with south America. 3. Ed Von der Porten spoke at the recommendation meeting and never mentioned the name of Francis Drake. 4. When the Drake Navigators Guild filed the original request for National Landmark, Francis Drake was all over the application but the NPS blacked-out all of the places where Francis Drake was mentioned. All of the documents will be in my next book. I then ask, why is the Guild allowed to have such a conflict of interest to place this type of ill-conceived text on the Nova Albion page? It demonstrates their true character. I have no conflict, no degrees to gain, no money to earn, it cost me money to maintain the Jensen Library because I accept no money, the little amount of dollars from book sales does not support me or the library in any way, the only conflict I have is to see the correct history of Oregon being recognized or at least a place at the table.Ggitzen (talk) 15:37, 16 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned to you earlier, WP:RX is not the place to suggest sources. Please use the relevant article talk pages. You may also wish to check out Reference desk and WP:RSN - NQ (talk) 09:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not taking my time to place it in a wrong area. How about a little help! Instead of "AS I mentioned earlier" Thank you.15:23, 22 July 2015 (UTC)

I don't know any background behind this, but you yourself have a conflict of interest as well. I'm not saying the other editor doesn't, I'm saying that you probably aren't the best to be complaining about it. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 01:16, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

My COI as you say is that I represent an organization from both Oregon and California and I have written and published extensively for the past decade about Francis Drake while the administrator, who has blocked any and all posts, has never written or published anything concerning Drake. To have no verifiable knowledge and then block anyone who has the credentials that I have acquired through years of research is contrary to wiki's model of openly editable content. Ggitzen (talk) 15:44, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The publications. Reliable sources are published by third-party sources. Again, I haven't reviewed the edits in question, but unless your point of view is represented in reliable sources that you did not publish, you should recuse yourself from the situation. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 15:59, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you challenging me when it is your administrator who is in the wrong with a conflict. If you look at the Nova Albion talk page, you will see that Michael Von der Porten and administer Steven Wright who are both on the Drake Navigators Guild board of directors colluded to have the New Albion page primarily to themselves and to place my work on the "Fringe Theories" page. Steve Wright is responsible for closing the Francis Drake page as well. I have had an article published in a double-blind peer-review international journal while the Guild has never been published except for self published works by the Drake Navigators Guild. Ed Von der Porten is the president and Michael is his son. I'm sorry but if you are not able to do anything about this, I'd like to have another person look at this situation.Ggitzen (talk) 16:15, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

In the future, please indent your posts on talk pages by using colons, for example :::::Example which produces

Example

Just since you seem to have not known about that. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 22:34, 25 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The publication is "Terrae Incognitae; The journal of the Society for the History of Discoveries", article "Edward Wright's World Chart of 1599", Volume 46.1, April 2014. It is a very respected journal of the highest order. Published by Taylor & Francis. ^[1]137.118.192.169 (talk) 23:08, 26 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I provided a reliable source, a double-blind, peer-review, international journal that was not self published and I have not heard back about opening up for posting on the Wiki Francis Drake and New Albion pages.Ggitzen (talk) 02:40, 1 November 2017 (UTC)Ggitzen (talk) 22:16, 3 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. Also, about your indenting, you have the right idea, but it's not quite right. I've corrected it here. Always use one more colon than the comment you are responding to. See this as an example. -A lad insane (Channel 2) 01:26, 4 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You said it looks good. Where do we go from here?Ggitzen (talk) 01:55, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]