User talk:Adph

Copyright problem: Alabama Department of Public Health
Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Alabama Department of Public Health, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from either web sites or printed material. This article appears to be a copy from http://www.adph.org, and therefore a copyright violation. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under allowance license, then you should do one of the following:


 * If you have permission from the author leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Alabama Department of Public Health and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". See Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
 * If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted under the GNU Free Documentation License (GFDL), versions 1.3 or later and Creative Commons Share Alike (CC-BY-SA), versions 3.0 or later, under CC-BY-SA, versions 3.0 or later, or that the material is released into the public domain'' leave a note at Talk:Alabama Department of Public Health with a link to where we can find that note.
 * If you own the copyright to the material: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the GFDL and CC-BY-SA, and note that you have done so on Talk:Alabama Department of Public Health. See Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at [ this temporary page]. Leave a note at Talk:Alabama Department of Public Health saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved. Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Drmies (talk) 00:57, 30 July 2009 (UTC)


 * Note: even if the material is released, the article as it is cannot stand: it reads like a message board or a public announcement, and certainly not like an encyclopedic article. Then there is the matter of the conflict of interest, given your username. Drmies (talk) 01:02, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

Conflict of interest
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant 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 conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC)

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

Because your account was used for promotion of a company, group, product or organization with a username that promotes or implies affiliation with the aforementioned. This includes, but is not limited to: adding spam links, creating promotional pages (this includes user pages), adding advertisements to existing articles, and adding promotional/favorable content about something you are affiliated with.
 * Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Use of Wikipedia for promotion of people, products, companies or other groups (even non-commercial or charitable ones) is considered Spam and is forbidden. Such actions will result in the blocking of the account involved. Please read FAQ/Organization and Conflict of interest for our policies about this.

In addition, user accounts are for individuals only, not for companies or groups or other collective editing. Your username should reflect this. Usernames that appear to be promotional (such as those that make reference to a company or product) violate our username policy and are typically blocked to enforce that policy.


 * What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:


 * Add the text below this message box.
 * Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * Tell us what new username you want to use. Please make sure that your new username does not violate our username policy and check that it has not already been taken (click here to search).
 * 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 instead you believe that you have been blocked by mistake (i.e., you have not in fact been using Wikipedia for promotional purposes), please write below this message box and replace the text "Your reason here" with the reason why. See also Appealing a block for more information. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  16:25, 12 August 2009 (UTC) formerly with the Wis. DPH

If you work for the ADPH then conflicy of interest policy prevents you from editing articles relating to the organisation. If unblocked, what else would you be interested in writing about? --Anthony.bradbury"talk" 23:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)


 * First unblock declined purely so we can focus on that last one. I'll notify Orangemike so that we can get more opinions on this; however, I support this user editing if they promise to stay clear of the ADPH page. m.o.p  17:47, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Adph, you replaced the ADPH article with what is essentially an advertisement and a likely copyright violation. You them spammed while logged out, even edit warring to replace the material:. If unblocked will you avoid this behavior?  Triplestop  x3  21:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Triplestop, I hopefully am not abusing the template by writing this here but I didn't want to put in a different unblock request to reply to your question, and I am unable to email you or edit your talk page. From what I understand by reading the documentation is that I can submit articles to my talk page and have admins discuss it, users alter it, and then have it approved before I actually update the entry itself, is that right? Although I have permission from the copywrite holder to include information from The Alabama Department of Public Health's website, and believe I have gone through the necissary steps to prove to wikipedia that I have permission, I understand how the previous content lifted from their site comes off as an advertizement. The reason that someone came in under the same IP range and edited the entry with the same article is because it was incorrectly assumed editing of the article had been denied to the user Adph due to the username being denied- it was therefore assumed that if the page was edited by a third party it would be consitered less of a conflict of interest. Those issues are understood by me now, to the best of my knowledge. I will rework the article if unblocked, and post it first to the talk page for approval, using a step by step process of submitting small factual items such as the address and departmental structure, and then go on to define historical and other facts with references outside of ADPH owned material. Based on the material that i have read, if I take that approach and there are any issues I won't be blocked for submitting it for review. I will not update the entry and continuously change it if users alter the content. I will go through the proper steps of discussion via the talk page to request that it be altered if I feel as though there is some factual problem- other than that, it is up to the community. All of this has stemmed from a lack of knowledge on this user's end. If I am mistaken in my logic on any of these points, please let me know. I will do what it takes to come to a resolution.  Adph Adph  10:10, 02 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You can submit new articles under your name space but if you intend to alter existing articles that you are affiliated with its subject, It is better to suggest changes in the article's talk page (not your talk page). Any editor,not necessary an admin, can approve your suggestions if he/she deems them useful and neutral. Sole Soul (talk) 23:01, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Loud and clear; I will definately do it that way from now on. Thanks!  Adph Adph  11:00, 03 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi Admins, just curious if there are any further steps I need to take to be returned to good standing with the Wiki community. Please let me know- Thanks for your time  Adph Adph  1:13, 09 December 2009 (UTC)
 * It's still not clear to us that you understand our principles on conflict of interest. Basically, we want you to agree that you will stay away from that article completely. I used to work for the Wis. DPH, and have never edited that article nor any on other state departments that I work(ed) for. We need articles to be written by actual third parties, people who are not connected to the subject matter. You undoubtedly have a great deal of expertise on health and public service issues; we'd like to see you working on things like that and staying away from the ADPH article entirely, other than to suggest possible improvements on the talk page of the article. -- Orange Mike  &#x007C;   Talk  13:34, 10 December 2009 (UTC)