User talk:CWB Group Investor Relations
Nick-D because I am still familiarizing myself with using Wikipedia my initial intentions would be to restrict my contributions to the Talk Pages of Wikipedia articles, specifically participating by citing potential references, recommending improvements and identify out-of-date or inaccurate information. As my comfort level grows I would begin making small contributions, ( i.e. Citing references in articles). Once I develop some confidence editing Wikipedia I would make larger contributions. I expect this process to take time. I also expect to experience many more learning curves, but I assure you my intentions are for the benefit of Wikipedia and its users. With my intentions in the open I am curious about restrictions surrounding my participation on Canadian Western Bank's Wikipedia article given my conflict of interest. Is it appropriate for me to participate in the Talk page on the Article if i properly identify my conflicts of interest? Finally I would restrict my participation to Articles that fall within my profession. More specifically articles related to public relations, communications and investor relations. Through some initial research I've identified three examples, which include, Media Relations, Corporate Communications and Press Release. I appreciate your response. Curtis Pelletier (talk) 02:35, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
- OK, I'm unblocking you so that you can change your user name (please don't edit until this change is made). I'd also strongly encourage you to read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest before actively editing. In regards to your question, if you really want to you can comment on Canadian Western Bank's talk page as long as you clearly identify yourself and your position at all times. Nick-D (talk) 06:38, 29 July 2011 (UTC)
CWB Group Investor Relations (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Requested username:
Request reason:
On Wed, Jul 27, 2011 at 12:57 PM, CWB Group Investor Relations <InvestorRelations@cwbank.com> wrote: > Hello Michael, > > This message is in response to the recent account block that you have initiated for the user account (CWB Group Investor Relations). > > You will have to excuse me for not fully understanding the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia as this is my first attempt at editing a page. I understand Wikipedia's, concerns surrounding a company representative editing their company page. I also understand the concerns surrounding the use of Wikipedia as a marketing tool. However, I have a definite concern with the information that is currently available on Wikipedia page for Canadian Western Bank (CWB). This information is severely outdated and in many cases it is inaccurate. I'll provide you with three specific examples for reference purposes. I will also use direct comparisons from the Wikipedia pages of Schedule 1 Banks in Canada that can be appropriately categorized as our “peers”. > > Example 1 > CWB is currently cited as being founded in 1988 however the bank was chartered as a schedule 1 bank in 1984 under the name Bank of Alberta. Is this due to the difference in the name of the company? Is it possible then to present this information in the same way Toronto Dominion Bank does on their Wikipedia page - by posting three separate "founded" dates? > - Canadian Western Bank 1988 > - Bank of Alberta 1984 > - Western & Pacific Bank of Canada 1982 > > Example 2 > CWB's timeline of mergers and acquisitions stops at 2005. I does not take into account the two significant acquisitions we made of Adroit Investment Management Ltd. and National Leasing Group Inc. (You can view our filings on SEDAR at www.sedar.com if you require references). These acquisitions were very significant to our business because they expanded our offering to include a full complement of financial services (banking, trust, insurance and wealth management). This full complement has also prompted us to no longer qualify CWB Group as being in the “Bank” industry. We now include ourselves in the “Financial Services” industry, as is the case for every other Schedule 1 Canadian Bank on Wikipedia. > > Example 3 > CWB has won numerous awards for its culture. These awards are published within the public domain and are widely recognized as respected and credible achievements awarded by third-parties. A number of our peers (i.e. Scotia Bank and TD Bank) post awards on their Wikipedia page. Why is CWB restricted from doing the same? > > With these examples in mind – Wikipedia has stated that a representative from Canadian Western Bank who specializes in accurately communicating the company’s information is not allowed to edit the company’s Wikipedia page. If that is the case then who should I communicate with to have accurate updates made to this Wikipedia page? > > Please note that with the exception of a few “marketing” phrases used in the “History” section of my update as well as the links to our “branch locations”, which could be categorized as inappropriate links, all of the updates I made are factually correct and available publicly. > > I look forward to hearing back from you about the course of action required to have Canadian Western Bank’s Wikipedia page updated with accurate, up-to-date and unbiased information. > > Thank you, > Curtis Pelletier > Communications Officer, Investor & Public Relations > Canadian Western Bank
Links to reliable sources (i.e., not your own) of this information should have been posted on the tak page of the article in question, with full disclosure of your conflict of interest.
Under no circumstances should an account in the name of the bank or any other collective entity been created, since we do not permit accounts used by any but single individual human beings. Curtis Pelletier, human being, certainly CAN contribute to this project, as long as he plays by the rules and does not attempt to commit any form of promotion (call it spin-doctoring, PR, spamming, advertisement, SEO, investor relations or what you will). CWB or any of its subdivisions, committees, offices, etc., being legal fictions, CANNOT, no more than can the Hudson's Bay Company, the Maple Leafs, the Conservative/Reform/Alliance Party, Vachon Inc., the Maritime Film Classification Board, four sophomores sitting in their college dorm at McGill making YouTube videos under the name "DeathMonitorzRule Productions", nor the CUPE.
-- Michael J. "Orange Mike" Lowrey
"When I get a little money I buy books; and if any is left, I buy food and clothes."
-- Desiderius ErasmusI hope you can see from this message that my intentions are sincere. Also, I struggle to understand why Wikipedia would want to restrict contributions and push away credible sources of information. Am I not accepted in this community because of a single mistake during my first experience? Is this how Wikipedia responds to all honest mistakes even after an individual acknowledges the violation that was made and takes responsibility for it? I honestly believe I can contribute valuable information to Wikipedia beyond the company I currently work for based on my academic background in Public and Investor Relation. As noted by OrangeMkie I've changed the e-mail address attached to this account to my personal g-mail account and requested the username change. I've also taken the time to review Wikipedia’s policies so I can avoid any future mistakes. I am more than willing to discuss this further should it be required, but I believe my transparency in this situation speaks for itself. Thank you for reconsidering my ability to contribute to Wikipedia.
Accept reason:
- Can you please identify the articles you intend to work on? You're not going to be unblocked to work on articles related to your employer. Nick-D (talk) 23:09, 28 July 2011 (UTC)
CWB Group Investor Relations (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Requested username:
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Why can't I edit Wikipedia?
Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, celebrity or other well-known individual, or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.
- Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?
Probably not. See WP:FAQ/Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, or organization. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.
- What can I do now?
You are still welcome to write about something other than your company or organization. If you do intend to make useful contributions on some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:
- Add the text
{{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}}on your user talk page. - Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
- Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
- Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
- Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.