User talk:Sbell1964co

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Sbell1964co, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. It is also worth noting that Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which specifically link them to one company or corporation. If your username does have such a name, it would be advisable for you to request a change of username.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! You can also just type {{helpme}} on your user page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! JoeSperrazza (talk) 19:39, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

Note: Always remember to substitute user warning templates. For help on user warnings, see the WikiProject on User Warnings.
Older warnings may have been removed, but are still visible in the page history.
[Admin: block | unblock / Info: contribs | page moves | block log | block list]

Junior Achievement

Can I suggest you read and reply to the conversation at Talk:Junior Achievement before making further changes to this article. Your current edits appear somewhat problematic. Dpmuk (talk) 18:21, 31 January 2012 (UTC)[reply]

AN/I notice

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. The thread is Junior Achievement. Thank you. Dpmuk (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

May 2012

This is your only warning; if you use Wikipedia for soapboxing, promotion or advertising again, as you did at Junior Achievement, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Drmies (talk) 19:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sbell1964co. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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. SÆdon ^talk 19:01, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You seem to be running into some bit of trouble

Hello Sbell1964co, it looks as though your having some time with some of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Let me suggest some reading about Wikipedia, so that you will know a bit more about how it operates.

First, please read Wikipedia:Ownership of articles. Please read it all, but to summarize it a bit: no one person or organization owns the content of any Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia articles are edited collaboratively, and no one, regardless of their affiliation, has any primacy in creating or approving content at Wikipedia. That is, merely because a Wikipedia article is about an organization doesn't mean that that organization, or its representatives, has any more control or say over what such an article says than anyone else.
Second, please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. In general, Wikipedia asks that people try to avoid writing about themselves, their clients, or organizations they belong to and have an interest in promoting. That is because Wikipedia strives to have articles which have a neutral point of view, that is, a point of view which is reflective of the total scholarship on a subject. A person who has a conflict of interest is likely to ignore scholarship which is critical, and will tend to over-represent information which is laudatory, and as such, it is best to leave the editing of articles to people with no connection to the organization, so they can properly and objectively evaluate the existing scholarship and ensure that the article presents a complete picture. When you say "We manage our brand very carefully and would not want our Wikipedia page content created by someone outside Junior Achievement." that presents a basic violation of Wikipedia's most important principles here: the information at Wikipedia is supposed to be managed by no one except the community at large, and the information in articles needs to reflect the entirety of reliable scholarship on a subject, not just what recieves official approval from that subject.

I hope this makes sense to you. The best way forward, in light of these problems, is to continue to make suggestions on the article talk page, but please cease adding or removing any information about the organization from the article itself. If you see something which is inaccurate or wrong, tell us how to fix it, show us a reliable source so that we can verify the changes that need to be made, and allow us to incorporate the changes in a way that meets Wikipedia's basic core values. I've left lots of blue-links here which help explain how Wikipedia works, please read them and if you have any further questions, feel free to ask me, and I will try to provide more information as I can. --Jayron32 19:16, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Jayron for your much more diplomatic comment. I noted that this has been going on for quite some time and I assumed that the editor was aware of these issues; I appreciate your more diligent explanation. Drmies (talk) 19:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit warring

Your recent editing history at Junior Achievement shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. Being involved in an edit war can result in your 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. Dpmuk (talk) 19:21, 11 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]