User talk:Rachel Elnaugh Fan Club

April 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, adding or significantly changing content without citing a reliable source, as you did with this edit to Red Letter Days, is not consistent with our policy of verifiability. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. If you are familiar with Wikipedia:Citing sources, please take this opportunity to add references to the article. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 21:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Rachel Elnaugh Fan Club. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Rachel Elnaugh, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 21:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add or change content without verifying it by citing reliable sources, as you did to Rachel Elnaugh. Please review the guidelines at Wikipedia:Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 21:05, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Rachel Elnaugh. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 21:07, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at Red Letter Days, you will be blocked from editing.
Your edits have been automatically marked as vandalism and have been automatically reverted. The following is the log entry regarding this vandalism: Red Letter Days was changed by Rachel Elnaugh Fan Club (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.973436 on 2012-04-16T21:10:39+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 21:10, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent editing history at Rachel Elnaugh shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.

To avoid being blocked, instead of reverting please consider using the article's talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection. Theroadislong (talk) 21:12, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully.

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, organization, or clients. 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, organization, or clients. 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.

If you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. A fluffernutter is a sandwich! (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]