Hello, I'm PigeonChickenFish. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Talk:Ashleigh Aston Moore. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 23:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm Jaysone Aston Moore and I absolutely did intend to offend, as you and every other person on this forum refusing to update with correct information have been offending my family for nearly 20 years. The only documentation I can find is a 30 year old Name Change certificate - which immediately puts the entirety of this page into question. Although it doesn't list her birthday or country of birth it does show her birth name and her mother's, which shows the credibility of your sources are complete garbage.
Please advise how I can get a copy of this to you and how to get this page locked from further false edits once things have been corrected Frobias (talk) 23:48, 22 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
so you're going to completely ignore my questions? Instead of looking for a resolution, hiding behind the same nonsense I've been running into for 17 years?
To answer your question, I need you to review WP:RS, we do not accept death certificates. If you are having such a historical issue with your sister Ashleigh Aston Moore's records, why wouldn't you have contacted the many places that have published the death as you have stated incorrectly, and had that fixed, or pursued legal action? Most likely the starting place to fix this "ongoing issue" doesn't started on Wikipedia. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 00:47, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
and in case it's not absolutely clear to you, the false information was published over a decade ago. A little late to have people rescind their information. And, hey, guess where they were pulling their info from? THIS SITE YOU MORON Frobias (talk) 01:23, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
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 COI}} template), including links or details of reliable sources that support your suggestions;
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.
I'm going to spell this out for you as plainly as possible, since you seem to be having difficulty with it.
First off, our surname is Aston Moore. That's not up for debate, and correcting a last name isn't a conflict of interest. It's literally keeping information correct.
The sources you are citing are primarily based off a self-published book in 2008 by a man who gathered his information from tabloids, fan fiction, and hey! Wikipedia directly. When attempting to contact him you'll find he has a defunct AOL email address. Lifeandstyle magazine also retrieved their information from the book, and Wikipedia itself, since people are under the (apparently extremely mistaken) impression that information posted here would be correct, or at least corrected soon if that's not the case.
No idea if it's going to go anywhere but I've reached out to wiki's legal section since (after nearly 20 years since she passed) I only have one legal document of hers, but it immediately invalidates the cited sources. You seem to be getting a perverse satisfaction out of keeping information on a dead woman's page incorrect so I'll ask that you leave me the hell alone and I'll refrain from future updates myself. Deal? Deal. Frobias (talk) 02:55, 23 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hi -- we all understand this is super stressful and has been for a while, and it seems like you've got a lot of attention on this now. There's a lot of eyes on your sister's page now. Whatever happened before, the involved people are going to go through the large list of new data and sources on the page to start amending things. I hate to say "it's not a fast process", given you've been apparently struggling for years already... but it's not.
But... it's in motion now. Anything you can dig up that comes from what are called "secondary" sources that we can get at online, that you can share on the talk page for her article, will be especially helpful. We promise no one wants to upset you, or do anything to harm her memory. The involved people are trying to fix it now, but it's a lot to untangle, especially for a--please forgive the wording--an older story without a huge amount of live, active, ongoing journalism to work from. It will happen. -- Very Polite Person (talk) 16:46, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
thank you for behaving like an actual person. Admittedly I did fly off the handle, but given the situation can it be any surprise?
I'm not a technical person at all. Since catching covid I have a hard time reading and following along with most subjects. This will debacle has been a nightmare. It's a little surprising to hear that my hard copy document of our name change is moot when it comes to this website, but I've reached out to the news archive project of British Columbia to see if they can at least find when the change was published - immediately invalidating Mr. Lentz.
Admittedly I did fly off the handle, but given the situation can it be any surprise?
Buddy, you're good. We've all lost someone(s), but hardly any of us have to do it with the extra headache of all this. It sucks,. There is as much visibility on this as there can be, and it will just increase over the next few days. I promise. I just shared it on a sort of notice board we have on the "back end" that is kind of tailored to this sort of thing. People will see it over time. This--being honest--may take weeks or longer to shake out, but it will.
Like I said--anything you or your family may have saved or know of, let us know on her article talk page. If you look there now, you'll see a bunch of new links for newspapers.com -- if you and yours know of more sources, even if just names/dates of articles, we've got a small army of nerds who may be able to work with it over time from clues.
I've reached out to the BC Newspaper archive based out of Simon Fraser University to see if they can lend a hand with at least finding where the name change was published. Since it was just my brother and I at the time of her passing we didn't seek to have an obit made or even pay attention to anything that was published - we were pretty destroyed at the time and just focused on paying our own respective rents.
Not sure if it'll help but if you message me on Reddit I'd be happy to provide a pic of the legal name change doc Frobias (talk) 17:23, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your patience--your diligence did turn up issues with those Lentz sources that will be a broader investigation by others, as he is used elsewhere too. You helping your sister here helped a lot of other people too in the long term. This is going to possibly cause thousands of articles to be updated (which in this context--is a very good thing). -- Very Polite Person (talk) 19:44, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If only the wiki Commons dudes were as helpful as you. I have an email, from Lentz's publisher, that they give permission to share, saying they never should have allowed him to print since he cites Wikipedia as a source. And his book came out after the incorrect information was added to Ashleigh's page. Fun times for all Frobias (talk) 20:19, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You are most welcome. Like I mentioned... we've all been in this kind of position in some way, and if we haven't, we all sure will someday. Can I ask you to upload whatever you feel is safe to share on that to Commons like you did the others and then post a link to it? I'd want to share it with the people involved in researching Lentz now.
Do I need to reupload or can you use the original one? I just submitted a request for undelete, since the rep with McFarland house gives permission IN THE EMAIL to use it as reference
All good. Thank you again. I admittedly thought you were a bot by the username, but you've been the most humane interaction on this site so far. It's.. it's really appreciated. I didn't realize how much dealing with this for 17 years has affected me until seeing the changes before the drive home and crying it out a little bit. My daughter can (when she's old enough) finally google her aunt without seeing these horrific lies. It means a lot. Frobias (talk) 22:41, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Very Polite Person you summoned me here. I see on the commons page that it was removed because the other party did not give authority for it to be published.
However, the representative from the publisher does say right there in the image that "You are more than welcome to share my image as proof, and feel free to direct any publisher-related questions to me as well; I am happy to correspond directly with wikipedia".
That does seem like authority to me, but I guess I we will have to look into the specific rules of wikipedia commons uploading if we want it up there. Though to be honest, I do believe that the misinformation that Lentz published will be removed from wikipedia, since the fact that he cites wikipedia itself is more than enough reason to remove him as an unreliable source from any article that cites him. So I don't know if it is very necessary to upload the email.
(On another note however, I am seriously doubting that Lentz is deceased. I believe the publisher is mistaken. Might be a bit weird to upload something that falsely claims someone is dead). Rorb lalorb (talk) 22:50, 28 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
ok, so the email isn't valid because both I and the publisher thought the extremely incorrect old man was dead by now. I get it. Meanwhile another mod is now telling me I have to get a Twitter account and pay that godawful website for a blue checkmark and you'll take anything at face value.
You guys do see how extremely ridiculous this is, right? Anyone can make a twitter account. Anyone can pay for a blue checkmark. Hell, I often get a good laugh from someone going by Liam Nissan with a blue checkmark but I can guarantee this guy wasn't in Taken.
I used to think this website actually had some validity and was trustworthy. You've all really proved otherwise, especially since this whole debacle stems from referencing a book where my family has repeatedly said it was wrong, and no one from wiki was willing to check. 17 years. 17 horrible years of people spouting off complete lies thanks to this site not willing to do the bare minimum of checking cited sources.
I haven't heard back from any news outlets but WatchMojo did respond to my inquiry and removed her from the recent video that started all this and asked for an interview. I declined but, thanks to all the sanctimonious gatekeeping on here, I might go ahead with it. Hey if I repeatedly say this website is full of complete horseshit on something that gets published, can it be added to every single wiki post? Just checking for posterity's sake. Frobias (talk) 03:56, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
What? What mod told you to get a Twitter? What?
That doesn't make any sense. The article for your sister was fixed? There's some ongoing discussion in another venue to review the use of that guy's books going forward.
Who is still telling you, that you need to do anything today?
Wikipedia does not accept photos of papers as they aren’t published. But Wikipedia does accept Twitter/social media posts by the subject, from verified accounts, about minor corrections. So if you want to fix a few details, if you can get a social media account verified and then post the change of name certificate there, then it will count as published, and the article will at the least say “according to her family member X <correction>”, or possibly take it as truth, depending on how argumentative people are. Basically, other Wikipedia editors can’t take your word as a wikipedia user that you are who you say you are or consider your talk page posts published. But if you use a verified social media account, readers can trust the social media site to verify that you said a thing, and it’s published permanently in an non-Wikipedia form. Mrfoogles (talk) 03:44, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'm not about to support a website owned and operated by a dude flying out Nazi salutes to satisfy updates on a Wikipedia page you people should have checked the referring sources of in the first place. Our grandfather was a Marine - we punch nazis, not pay them. Frobias (talk) 03:46, 31 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, I'm PigeonChickenFish. Although everyone is welcome to contribute to Wikipedia, it's important to be mindful of the feelings of your fellow editors, who may be frustrated by certain types of interaction, such as your addition to Talk:Ashleigh Aston Moore. While you probably didn't intend any offense, please do remember that Wikipedia strives to be an inclusive atmosphere. In light of that, it would be greatly appreciated if you could moderate yourself so as not to offend. Thank you. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 23:30, 22 May 2025 (UTC)
Please remember to assume good faith when dealing with other editors, which you did not do on Talk:Ashleigh Aston Moore. Thank you. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 00:21, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
Please stop attacking other editors. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. PigeonChickenFish (talk) 01:58, 23 May 2025 (UTC)
