User talk:Officesquirrel LLC

Office squirrel LLC (Hiroko Konishi) Agent office--Officesquirrel LLC (talk) 17:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Hello, I'm TheFarix. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Hiroko Konishi has been undone because it did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks. —Farix (t | c) 20:13, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Do the the possible legal threat that you posted at Talk:Hiroko Konishi, I have brought the matter to Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents for review. —Farix (t | c) 20:51, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, Officesquirrel LLC. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the article Hiroko Konishi, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your circle, your organization, its competitors, projects or products;
instead propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. — JJMC89 (T·C) 21:09, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

February 2016

Your account has been blocked from editing Wikipedia with this username. This is because your username, Officesquirrel LLC, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below) and continue editing.

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines and create the account yourself. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you think that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Drmies (talk) 22:47, 28 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone, This is not a legal threat. This account name is not misleading. Is the company employer identification number of the national tax agency of Japan (Japan language). I'm sorry. This is a us account. Please write "345" on the company's blog.False articles in trouble Thank you.--Officesquirrel LLC (talk) 00:31, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

? Drmies (talk) 00:42, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

In trouble. The false articles.--Officesquirrel LLC (talk) 00:57, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

あたしは日本語がまあまあできます。日本語で書いてもいいです。翻訳しましょう。 (I can communicate so-so in Japanese. You can write in Japanese if you like. I'll translate.) Drmies and other admins, I'll help translate/interpret if you'd like me to. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:46, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging Mendaliv as well.

The document linked here appears to be a legal threat to Wikipedia but I will ask to see if this is intended for Wikipedia directly to be clear/sure.

Officesquirrel LLCさん - このリンクの内容のついて、誰が「被疑者」ですか？Wikipedia？Wikipediaのユーザー？告訴ですか？EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 18:59, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind. This is a clear legal threat regarding alleged libel. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 19:16, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure? If it's a description of action taken, that's not a threat. i.e. "The police are investigating a crime in Japan. The article in Wikipedia has false information that was made by a suspect, please remove it." -> is not a legal threat. A legal threat has a "or else I will seek a legal remedy" to make it a legal threat. I didn't see anything that indicated a threat directed at Wikipedia or editors. Was there something more clear about future legal action for not complying with their demand? --DHeyward (talk) 00:19, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

It says they faxed a report to the police about defamation on Wikipedia by two editor. (*平成２８年２月２７日午後１０：００，Wikipedia書き込み者２名，その他新たな閲覧可能な　名誉毀損ページを確認したため，長野県警担当刑事課長宛に報告書をファクシミリ送信。) That sounds like legal action at least. EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 00:45, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

EvergreenFir Only Straight from the policy That users are involved in a legal dispute with each other, whether as a result of incidents on Wikipedia or elsewhere, is not a reason to block, so long as no legal threats are posted on Wikipedia. Editors involved in a legal dispute should not edit articles about parties to the dispute, given the potential conflict of interest. They don't appear to be making a demand, only a notice and request for edit (they shouldn't edit the article themseklves. WP does not get involved in legal disputes so as long as it's not a threat (i.e. "Do action X or I will do legal action Y"). This appears to be "We are involved in a legal dispute, it's COI to edit the article, please correct it." Editors can be engaged in legal action against each other and it's not a threat to just be involved. Neither the IPs or this editor should be editing the article but blocking isn't justified without a threat for future legal action. --DHeyward (talk) 06:54, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The current block is for the username. I'd like to see this user's response to my question, but I guess based on their current edit history they have not directly threatened anyone with legal action, just started that they took some. That honestly seems like a very fine line to me ... EvergreenFir (talk) Please {{re}} 07:14, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Only or Drmies should unblock and allow username change as the user requested. Policy allows editors to take legal action even against other editors over wikipedia; they simply cannot hold the project hostage to legal threats. This is a rather important distinction considering how harassment is expected to be handled and involving law enforcement or civil legal action is not a barrier to participation. The policy exists so that threats are not used to manipulate the process and it doesn't appear to be the case here. --DHeyward (talk) 11:24, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I agree that there's some question as to whether NLT applies (however taking the broader circumstances into account, including the editor's conduct at jpwiki, suggests that this is a case of an editor pursuing legal action in order to suppress a competing—and to my understanding, non-BLP violating—version of an article). I would argue, however, that there's evidence this editor is a case of WP:NOTHERE... in short, engaged in disruptive conduct lying in the penumbra of NLT, and which does not contribute to encyclopedia writing. In any event, if the ongoing block is disputed, I think the discussion would be better had over at the ANI thread that started this. —/Mendaliv/^2¢/_Δ's/ 19:11, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

Officesquirrel LLC (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

NTakahashi (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Decline reason:

Per EvergreenFir's look at it and per Google translate's translation of the website being linked. We cannot allow users to edit while presenting legal threats. only (talk) 22:09, 29 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]