Wikipedia talk:Sockpuppet investigations/Douglasclayton

Sockpuppet accusation

I joined the Private Equity Task-force to begin a similar history to yourself but concentrating on the ASEAN region and Cambodia in particular, given its increasing popularity and under appreciated status. Towards this end I made the Kith Meng and The Royal Group pages and sought to tidy up numerous others relating to the country's largest business deals of late, and in doing so I was lead to Leopard Capital, on which which I then spent a considerable amount of time, tidying things up and imbuing a more neutral tone whilst removing dead links and/or links leading to the company's website, simultaneously verifying the claims of the entry (and, also removing claims that weren't verifiable). I thought, like helpful administrative User:Discospinster had done previously, I would if anything be thanked for my work? From the perspective of detailing commerce-centric Cambodian based networks, it's fairly practical to overview that country's first and biggest private equity fund -- and no, I'm not connected to this specific company: that is my point -- I'm sure you'd agree. That to claim otherwise (that is that it's not fair practice to overview Cambodia's first and biggest private equity fund, particularly given the country's small-sized population) would risk inhibiting the Wikipedia Project of Countering Systemic-Bias vis-a-vis Cambodia's economy, and say be arguably comparable to not mentioning Wall Street when overviewing America's economy, seems reasonably obvious to your truly.

Indeed, Cambodia's business sector is already under-represented on Wikipedia, and I have recently listed it under the 'Expansion Needed' heading on the WikiProject Cambodia page.

Please explain what's required by you to see things rectified?

I'm new to Wikipedia and don't want this accusation remaining on my account, as I intend to keep contributing! I really enjoy the collaborative nature of contributing to Wikipedia.

Cheers (Petersgoldpan (talk) 05:44, 5 July 2011 (UTC))[reply]