User talk:WLN FEM

July 2025

Hello, I'm ChildrenWillListen. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, but you didn't provide a reliable source. On Wikipedia, it's important that article content be verifiable. If you'd like to resubmit your change with a citation, your edit is archived in the page history. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. 🧙‍♀️ Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:23, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, beware of making thinly-veiled legal threats. 🧙‍♀️ Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:24, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Please refrain from making unconstructive edits to Wikipedia, as you did at Klaus-Jürgen Bathe. Your edits appear to be disruptive and have been or will be reverted.

If you are engaged in an article content dispute with another editor, please discuss the matter with the editor at their talk page, or the article's talk page, and seek consensus with them. Alternatively, you can read Wikipedia's dispute resolution page, and ask for independent help at one of the relevant noticeboards.
If you are engaged in any other form of dispute that is not covered on the dispute resolution page, please seek assistance at Wikipedia's Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents.

Please ensure you are familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and please do not continue to make edits that appear disruptive. Continued disruptive editing may result in loss of editing privileges. Thank you. 🧙‍♀️ Children Will Listen (🐄 talk, 🫘 contribs) 03:31, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The new changes are made in accordance with three points:

1. It is not true what is said about K. J. Bathe's parents;

2. K. J. Bathe obtained permission from the German Courts at

the time to leave Germany. What is said about the military draft

is also false;

3. There should be no reference to the 1st Edition of the book

'To Enrich Life'; this edition has not been available for more

than five years, and will never be available again. References

should be made exclusively to the 2nd Edition, published in 2019.

Moreover, there is no point in packing so many details under

the 'Early life' section, in order to make it disproportionately

larger than the others. The Wikipedia profile should be straight to

the point. Why talk about 'hitchhiking', 'Italian memorials' and his

uncle's farm in the 'Early life' section while at the same time keeping

the 'Career' section with only five lines? WLN FEM (talk) 03:33, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What are your sources for points 1 and 2? —C.Fred (talk) 03:34, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Klaus-Jürgen Bathe shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war; read about how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly. —C.Fred (talk) 03:32, 13 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, WLN FEM. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Klaus-Jürgen Bathe, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for article subjects for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the Edit Request Wizard), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Wikipedia:Conflict of interest § How to disclose a COI);
avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam § External link spamming);
do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation. See Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicizing, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Kj cheetham (talk) 22:23, 21 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kj cheetham,

Thank you for the reply.

It's because an editor, for some reason, is spreading misinformation about the person whose page we are trying to protect. Therefore we would like to ask the Wiki administrators to protect the page. It's just that. Thanks again. WLN FEM (talk) 14:38, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response. Who is "we"? Please be aware that Wikipedia accounts must not be shared and are for individual people only (as per WP:NOSHARING). Do you have a connection to the subject? Please discuss content issues on the talk page of the article as there is unlikely to be grounds for page protection if it's not being actively vandalised. Discussion via edit summaries isn't really sufficient, and repeatedly making the same changes is potentially edit warring (see WP:EDITWAR). -Kj cheetham (talk) 15:00, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Kj cheetham,

Thank you for the new reply.

So there is one editor, 'me', trying to write something, and there is another editor, trying to write something completely different. When you say "please discuss content issues on the talk page of the article" do you mean that I must go there and, through argumentation, try to convince the other editor to refrain from writing what he/she has been writing? Is there no 'authority' or arbiter whom we could appeal to and inform what is happening? WLN FEM (talk) 23:33, 22 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]

No this is a collaborative project which means we work through consensus of the community. There is no authority on any article, no one owns any article and we try and hold true to published sources whether they are in still in print or not. If you have a valid reason for thinking something should be changed, attempted to make the change and it was reverted, then your next step is to go to the article talk page; Start a discussion on your change, the reason and secondary sourcing to support the change if needed. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:25, 23 March 2026 (UTC)[reply]