User talk:Dtwdwa

March 2022

Hello, I'm Mako001. I wanted to let you know that one of your recent contributions—specifically this edit to Department of Training and Workforce Development—has been undone because it appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help desk. Thank you. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 07:36, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Dtwdwa. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Department of Training and Workforce Development, 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 organizations for more information. We ask that you:

avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the {{request edit}} template);
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, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 07:37, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, as a Western Australian myself, I am ashamed of you. Ashamed, and very disappointed. As a public servant, you should know better. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 07:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for the message. We were merely trying to make the page more informative as to what the Department does, as well as to correct some inaccurate and outdated information. We have now edited the revised page again, but this time only corrected the building name and appointment status of the Director General, and a minor correction to the statement about WA Government agencies.

As for this comment you made in your message to us:

“Honestly, as a Western Australian myself, I am ashamed of you. Ashamed, and very disappointed. As a public servant, you should know better.”

This is not only rude but also insulting. As a member of the Wikipedia community, you should know better. We thank you for the advice that you offered, but if you ever speak to us again in this manner you will be reported as it is a clear violation of the terms of use, specifically:

“ – You support a civil environment and do not harass other users”

Thank you.

Dtwdwa (talk) 16:14, 12 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Department of Training and Workforce Development

Hi Dtwdwa, you may want to have a real good read of Wikipedia:Conflict of interest as your edit summaries make it clear that you are closely associated with the department. Additionally, Wikipedia:Copyrights requires some studying here as I suspect the IP edit made just before your account was created makes me suspect that this was you as well. These are core Wikipedia policies and must be adhered to. Calistemon (talk) 00:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Notice of Conflict of interest noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard regarding a possible conflict of interest incident with which you may be involved. Thank you. Calistemon (talk) 03:46, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page.

This will enforce your retirement. Cullen328 (talk) 04:47, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. But I have already “retired” this account and no longer have any interest in participating in anything related to Wikipedia, after the bullying and harassment I have been subjected to in the less than 24 hours since I set up my account - direct violations of your own “conduct” rules. What I thought was supposed to be a safe, collaborative community-minded space dedicated to sharing information is in fact the direct opposite.

I have made no violations of copyright, and there is no conflict of interest here - do you think nobody edits their own article page, if it has incorrect or inaccurate content? I was merely trying to correct outdated and incorrect information in the article, and add some information that expanded on the Department’s role. It was not for advertising or promotion - we are a government department, we are not selling anything.

This whole experience has been awful and I have no desire to continue allowing your “editors” to harass me.

As per the advice of your own terms and conditions:

- being civil - focusing on the content of edits rather than on personal issues - participating in a respectful and considerate way without ignoring the positions and conclusions of others - assume by default that other people's intentions are to improve the project - discuss editors' actions but do not accuse them of harmful motives without clear evidence

perhaps you and your colleagues might in future consider these points instead of first interacting rudely and making accusations then blocking a new user without any repercussions. for their behaviour.

Thank you. Dtwdwa (talk) 05:19, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits have been in violation of two major policies here, and people who violate these policies are blocked routinely and immediately. We do not allow group or agency or company accounts and we do not allow such accounts to edit encyclopedia articles about themselves. This is conflict of interest 101. If you want a friendly discussion, then read the links that have been provided to you, self reflect and file a properly formatted unblock request. Cullen328 (talk) 05:30, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah.. yet another rude, arrogant reply. I should have expected that, and not wasted my time trying to explain the situation.

I have read all of the information that has been provided to me. I accept that I made a mistake. I do not accept the way I have been bullied and harassed.

Please do not respond to this, I do not wish to deal with you or any of your colleagues. I will not be requesting an unblock as I have no interest in being part of this horrible place. Thanks. Dtwdwa (talk) 05:37, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

horrible place? - go on...

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=14.203.16.45 you started the problem - very clearly identified in the edit summary...

Please be careful who you accuse of what - you started with an edit that showed

no understanding of what wP:ABOUT and WP:NOT You could have taken it all much more slowly and taken to time to ask for help

rather than run over more experienced editors comments and warnings:

All contributions on wikipedia are open source and clearly available and identifiable:

The first calamity = https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Special:Contributions&target=14.203.16.45 - a copyvio

The second calamity = Please note: these edits have been done by the Department’s Communications and Marketing team for accuracy. We note that our earlier update has been deleted - perhaps next time you could give us the courtesy of contacting us first before taking such action. Website@dtwd.wa.gov.au. Thank you. - a clear indication of knowing how wikipedia works?

(removed what is available in edit history anyways) JarrahTree 01:43, 15 March 2022 (UTC) Please stop harassing me! I have said several times now that I made a mistake. I am new here. I was spoken to in a very rude way by people here - here is just one example, it’s what Mako001 said to me after my first time editing:[reply]

“ Honestly, as a Western Australian myself, I am ashamed of you. Ashamed, and very disappointed. As a public servant, you should know better. Mako001 (C) (T) 🇺🇦 07:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)”

Is that ok? No, it is not. I am being berated for my newness and not knowing all the rules, yet people who have been here for years are behaving in a way that directly conflicts with WP’s conduct guidelines that they presumably know very well.

I meant no harm and had no ill intent. I accepted the feedback that I received, despite how rudely it was written. You are now the fourth person to write me a nasty message. It’s bullying, plain and simple. I have not been rude to anyone here. Please just leave me alone. Dtwdwa ([User talk:Dtwdwa#top|talk]]) 06:04, 13 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Surprisingly, I have to agree with you. Mako001, that comment was entirely unnecessary and inflammatory. JarrahTree, there really was no need to pile on like that. Yes, they violated our COI rules. That doesn't mean you need to dump a detailed list of wrongdoings on their talk page "for the record" GeneralNotability (talk) 14:40, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]