Talk:Charles Shoebridge

message: In your comment above you claim to have made changes in accordance with WP:BLP policies.  However your edits do not comply with the policy on writing about yourself.  According to that you should only edit "if the article contains defamation or a serious error that needs to be corrected quickly." And the edits you made do not fit in that category.  You might want to consider opening a discussion at the Wikipedia Biographies of living persons noticeboard where Wikipedia BLP experts can help refine the article for you.  You can also continue the discussion of your proposed changes on this page, but the noticeboard is where the experts are.  
For now I have reverted the changes you made.  Your version was sanitized to the point of sounding like a resume, and that's also a problem for an article like this.  Please remember that reverting edits in this situation, especially considering the conflict of interest, could easily be considered edit warring, and could ultimately result in a blocking of editing privileges. —    Bill W.    (Talk)  (Contrib)  (User:Wtwilson3)  — 15:26, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  [[WP:COI|Conflict of interest editing]] 

message: There seems to be a faction (if I may describe it thus) on this talkpage which objects to the inclusion of any material about Shoebridge beyond the rather basic and easily provable facts that he was some guy who was on TV for a while, and then was not on TV for a while due to the shenanigins of others, and now is on TV again. An article reduced to such very basic facts would have difficulty establishing the notability required in order to remain on Wikipedia.
There is also an editor on this talkpage who, assuming good faith, is Shoebridge himself. This editor has, if I understand matters correctly, indicated that he would prefer there not to be an article about himself on Wikipedia.
It is my understanding of common practice (and thus consensus, which may trump policy if policy is silent) that we take the subject's wishes on deletion into account - perhaps only to a limited degree - in cases where notability is unclear.
The methodology for doing so is for the subject to contact WP:Volunteer response team and to establish that they are indeed the subject (by whatever means the volunteer response team do that), and to indicate their preference in the matter of article or no article. This would then be recorded officially by something called an "OTRS ticket" which could be added to this talkpage and/or referenced in any Articles for Deletion discussion. (The details and contents of the OTRS ticket itself, and the correspondence, would not be publicly viewable.)
Charles (addressing you here since I can be reasonably sure you will look here, not sure about your various accounts), if this is all the case then please go to Wikipedia:Contact us - Subjects and use the first of the two email addresses presented there (the info-en-q one) and ask them to make the necessary arrangements to confirm this. To begin with, it is simplest merely to ask them to verify that you are Charles Shoebridge and that you prefer there not to be an article about yourself on Wikipedia (you could mention this talkpage); explaining all of the whys and wherefores is not necessary at this stage.
If you are not sure whether you'd like Wikipedia to have an article about you or not, or you think it could be "fixed" (which I think it can, but it will likely take some time), or if you don't want to bother with emails and verification processes when they have no guarantee of achieving the desired result anyway, then that's fine too and you could just let us know here.
Whichever is the case, unfortunately I probably won't have much if any time to address the problems here for at least a week or so, for which I apologise. I do see however that a very experienced editor has today (I think) begun making some needed improvements to the article itself, so things may get better rapidly in my absence anyway. --Demiurge1000 (talk) 18:16, 5 September 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: based on the lack of sources with good biographical information, I wouldn't oppose deletion.  Tough situation. Jytdog (talk) 01:14, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Notability 

message: in the face of your adding back claims about "counter-terrorism with the British Army and Scotland Yard," and in the face of the constant complaints of UK1000, I will compromise and agree to let that stand, even though the sourcing is weak.  However there is still no source for "A graduate of the Royal Military Academy Sandhurst" nor is there any source for "he served for almost two decades" so I took those out, per WP:BLP.  Jytdog (talk) 00:35, 6 September 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  edits by Mdann52 today