User talk:MBernsteABL

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, MBernsteABL. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Alameda Belt Line, 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 COI}} template)—don't forget to give details of reliable sources supporting 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. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 23:19, 1 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for reaching out, and my apologies for not reading the guidelines PRIOR to editing. I am an employee of Alameda Belt Line - one of the first three - and just wanted to show that the company is back operating. I see how to request an edit in the future using the COI templates, but how do I correct or rectify the edit I already made? MBernsteABL (talk) 02:08, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I have already reverted the edits that you made. Besides the conflict of interest, the article that you edited is a completely unrelated railroad that has no connection to the one you work for. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 04:06, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the help. They are actually the same railroad - by decision of the STB and ICC. You can't "create" a new railroad without a long application process nor can you get legal standing in California. Hence the two Class 1 railroad owners "brought back" the fallen flag, just in a different city. MBernsteABL (talk) 16:03, 2 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Since it shares no actual operational history, just the legal entity, it wouldn't be appropriate to significantly change the existing Alameda Belt Line article. More likely, a paragraph at Alameda Corridor with a one-sentence note at Alameda Belt Line explaining the legal reuse would be appropriate. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 03:19, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the Alameda Corridor is the appropriate location. The Alameda Corridor is a piece of physical infrastructure that is operated by ACTA and owned by the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach. Yes, we (ABL) are dispatching it, but as a subcontractor. We are a completely separate entity from ACTA, and we are setting up full railroad operations, using the RailInc assigned MARK ABL, that will cover a lot of railroad area and territory that is outside of the Alameda Corridor.

If the proposal of separating the page into 'Historical' and 'Current' isn't appropriate, then would two separate pages with one being 'old' and one being 'new' be appropriate? MBernsteABL (talk) 21:50, 3 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]