User talk:Policyowner

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).

Welcome!

Hello, Policyowner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome! 

 ~ clearthought 15:47, 19 July 2006 (UTC)
Please do not add commentary and your personal analysis of an article into Wikipedia articles. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. --BaronLarf 04:51, 22 July 2006 (UTC)

Welcome!

Hello Policyowner, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of your edits have not conformed to Wikipedia's Neutral Point of View policy, and have been reverted. Wikipedia articles should refer only to facts and interpretations that have been stated in print or on reputable websites or other forms of media.

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to National Life Insurance Company. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Hagerman(talk) 00:49, 27 August 2006 (UTC) There's a page about the NPOV policy that has tips on how to effectively write about disparate points of view without compromising the NPOV status of the article as a whole. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

Please do not add commentary or your own personal analysis to Wikipedia articles, as you did to National Life Insurance Company. Doing so violates Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy and breaches the formal tone expected in an encyclopedia. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. Hagerman(talk) 00:50, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Please stop. If you continue to violate Wikipedia's NPOV policy by adding commentary and your personal analysis into articles, as you did to National Life Insurance Company, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Hagerman(talk) 00:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning. The next time you violate Wikipedia's NPOV rule by inserting commentary or your personal analysis into an article, as you did to National Life, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Hagerman(talk) 00:52, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

Contents

[edit] Email sent about demutualization

Policyowner, I sent you an email about demutualization: "While I understand your goal of promoting demutualization, wikipedia is not a place for campaigns. You wouldn't go promoting christianity on all the articles about judaism, islam, buddism, etc, would you? So I ask that you please stop copying and pasting demutualization information to all the mutual insurance companies pages on wikipedia.

I think a much better and more effective solution would be to start a page called "List of demutualized insurance companies", and even include how much money on average went back to policyowners for each company."

Please consider my suggestion. Crimson117 14:40, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for experimenting with the page Pacific Life on Wikipedia. Your test worked, and it has been reverted or removed. Please use the sandbox for any other tests you may want to do. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:49, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to New York Life Insurance Company. It is considered vandalism. If you would like to experiment, use the sandbox. Thank you. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:50, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Western & Southern Financial Group, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:51, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Union Central Life Insurance Company, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Acacia Life Insurance Company, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:53, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Ameritas Life Insurance Company, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:54, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:55, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Company, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to National Life Insurance Company, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:56, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

This is your last warning.
The next time you vandalize a page, as you did to Western & Southern Financial Group, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A link to the edit I have reverted can be found here: link. If you believe this edit should not have been reverted, please contact me. TheRanger 16:58, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

It has become apparent that your account is only being used for vandalism, so it has been blocked indefinitely.

--JYolkowski // talk 18:52, 28 October 2006 (UTC)

In response to your e-mail: One of our core policies is that articles must be written using a neutral point of view, as Wikipedia is not a soapbox. As well, adding self-promotional external links is strongly discouraged. Another core principle of the community is that, if people communicate with you indicating that your behaviour is inappropriate, it is important to discuss civilly with the user, not continue your behaviour unchecked. Finally, based on your username, you give the impression of being on Wikipedia solely for the purpose of promoting your own beliefs. Based on all of the above, I'm not inclined to unblock (although if you want to create a new account and make different, positive, contributions, that's fine by me). However, if you'd like another administrator to take a second look, please add {{unblock|reason why you think you should be unblocked}} to this page (you can still edit this page, even when blocked) and someone else will be along shortly to review your block. Cheers, JYolkowski // talk 20:09, 29 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] policyowners comments after being blocked

In August 2006 I had extensive discussions with Hagerman, who is a Wikipedia editor,regarding my posting to National Life Insurance Company. I worked with him through various edits until he approved a template for that company as well as others.

Your blocking me from editing postings that are mere advertisements for life insurance companies is uncalled for and smacks of censorship. Perhaps you can visit with Hagerman and the three of us can arrive at an agreement.

"The Ranger" on October 28 stated, "Please do not add nonsense to Wikipedia, as you did to New York Life Insurance Company. It is considered vandalism..." I do not consider anything in my edit to be nonsense and therefore vandalism. All information provided is factual and verifiable. I am not a policyowner of any companies that I have been blocked from editing.

I have engaged in extensive original research on the companies I edited and am convinced that these companies are using Wikipedia as a vehicle to promote their products and services. The postings, other than mine, read like they have been written by the marketing arms of these companies. As an example, examine the postings of myself and "PLDefender" to Pacific Life beginning on October 3, 2006. Interesetingly, he disappeared following an email I sent to him stating he must be employed by Pacific Life given his name and his embellished postings. My bet would be that "Crimson117" is now doing his bidding. (unsigned comment from PolicyOwner)

I make all my wikipedia edits on my own volition. I'm in no way related to PLDefender, except that apparently PLDefender and I agree that your edits were mostly vandalism. I have no hidden agenda. In full disclosure, I do work at NYL, but not for any sort of PR department or anything where they would want or expect me to be editing wikipedia for my job. Helping with wikipedia is done strictly from a personal point of view. Crimson117 18:51, 6 November 2006 (UTC)

I remain willing to modify and edit my writings as I did with Editor Hagerman in August. I am not willing however to become a member of a company's advertising and public relations department. Perhaps I should have used "Policyownerprotector" as my wikipedia name, because one of the reasons Yolkowski stated for his block was: "based on your username, you give the impression of being on Wikipedia solely for the purpose of promoting your own beliefs."

I look forward to hearing from you regarding this issue.

Regards, Policyowner

  • I have great concern for your comments above, I feel that they either you do not understand the issues that other people have workded hard to bring to your attention on at several times in the past. My main concerns are:
1. Your accont seems to only be used to edit articles of insurance compaines with your message about demutualization. In these posting it seems that you just cut and paste the same message to many diffrent compaines pages.
2. Even in your post above you state "I have engaged in extensive original research on the companies I edited and am convinced..." Wikipedia is not a place for any orginal research this is an encylopedia and all information needs to be able to be cited to a source and in the case of your own research this is not possible.
3. Also I will point out this is not the first time this has been talked about, after a few weeks you would simple come back and repost the same information that other editors had to work to remove to restore the articles.
4. Finally in order to try to be restored you have removed warning that were posted to this page. In fact the warning were removed after the block was put in place. If the removal of the warning contiunes you may be block from editing this page also.
I think from your post above that if you are unblocked the same type of posts will again become a problem. TheRanger 22:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
Agreed, I support the block. I attempted in the past to provide some constructive feedback which was misinterpreted by Policyowner as an excuse to post a cookie-cutter statement on demutualization on several insurance companies pages. I don't appreciate the comments by Policyowner which drag me into this as an apparent "supporter" of the edits that were made. The situation has gone out of hand and I completely agree with TheRanger that unblocking Policyowner will result in the same edits. Best, Hagerman(talk) 00:55, 5 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Please do not remove warnings from your talk page

Please do not remove warnings that are posted to your user page it is vandalism. The fact that the warning were removed after a block was issued makes the removal of the warnings even more of a issue. TheRanger 22:18, 3 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] National Life Group

Hello, Policyowner, and welcome to Wikipedia. An article you recently created, National Life Group, has been tagged for speedy deletion because its content is clearly written to promote a company, product, or service. This article may have been deleted by the time you see this message. Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not an advertising service. Thank you. Dtwarren 05:13, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

This blocked user (block log | autoblocks | unblock | contribs) asked to be unblocked, but an administrator or other user has reviewed and declined this request. Other administrators or users can also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy). This unblock request continues to be visible. Do not replace this message with another unblock request nor add another unblock request.

Request reason: "reason why you think you should be unblocked"

Decline reason: "No reason given to unblock -- Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 14:55, 30 October 2006 (UTC)"

This template should be removed when the block has expired, or after 2 days in the case of blocks of 1 week or longer.
It is suspected that this user may be a sock puppet, meat puppet or impersonator of Spotlighter.
Please refer to Wikipedia:Suspected sock puppets/Spotlighter for evidence. See block log
Notes for the suspect Notes for the accuser
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../p/o/l/User_talk%7EPolicyowner_476f.html"