User talk:ChaplainLoo

About your username
Welcome to Wikipedia. I noticed that the username you have chosen, "AnglicanChaplains", seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of something other than yourself. Please note that you may not edit on behalf of a company, group, institution, product, or website, and Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are promotional or have the appearance of shared use. If you are willing to use a personal account, please take a moment to create a new account or request a username change that represents only yourself as an individual. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and remember that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you.--Shirt58 (talk) 01:37, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks... not knowing much being new to Wiki, I'm watching YouTubes and Wiki tutorials... it's worn me out! My username was general and related to my position with the Anglican Chaplains, whom Bishop Jones leads. I think I've fixed most of what you suggested and I see that a couple of other people have added new information and citations. Thanks for what you do and sorry I sent you an e-mail... I just now figured out how to talk to you on this page... V/R Lauren --AnglicanChaplains (talk) 03:11, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

January 2013
Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If your username doesn't represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. If you prefer to be unblocked for the purpose of changing your username to a username which complies with our username policy, so that your contributions with this username are recorded as contributions of your new username and rather than creating a new account, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice instead. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 15:45, 1 January 2013 (UTC)


 * We do not allow "Administrator" in a username either due to the potential for confusion with Wikipedia's administrator corps (i.e. implies authority). Please see WP:Username policy and choose a new name that complies with it. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 00:05, 2 January 2013 (UTC)

Here are a few key questions:
 * Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a business directory?
 * Do you understand conflict of interest?
 * Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. Max Semenik (talk) 17:41, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * As an outside person here as well, can I say a few things: first, everyone here who has commented/blocked wants you unblocked. There are a couple of glitches with some of your understanding.  First, any userid with "administrator" or "admin" will not be permitted as editors would believe that it meant "Wikipedia administrator".  Second, if someone has what appears to be a promotional username, you're right - they should not be blocked immediately ... unless their only edits have been to related topics - at that point we do have to block.  You are correct, however, that most of the other choices you made (such as AnAnglicanChaplain) would be totally 100% fine to use - so pick one, insert it into the "new username" part of your unblock.  Someone will then unblock you and give you directions on how to go get that username changed.  It's that easy.  Just ensure, however, that you do not edit anything with which you have COI, or insert links to an organization you're involved with, etc - WP:COI and WP:PROMO are taken quite seriously.  So, in short, sorry you're having a bit of a rough go so far - it's easy enough to fix by fixing your unblock, and answering Max's questions honestly!  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 18:14, 2 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you BWilkins. I just wish someone would have said - hey, your username is bad - and told me how to fix it. And you say give honest answers? I haven't been dishonest about anything; and I guess I'm too dumb to have figured out that in all this blocking business someone was asking me a question?!?!!  Of course I'll answer the questions for Max... Business directory? No... in my self description, I thought I was doing it correctly by talking about Anglican Chaplaincy since most of my articles will involve that area and my expertise to write is in that area... such as my first one on Bishop Jones, and the next one on Chaplain Alliance for Religious Liberty (the one I'm working on now), Anglican Chaplains, Chaplain resources, etc. I'll change my EditingUser info to a more of an "about me" format.  Conflict of interest? Not sure how it is conflict of interest to write about something you know something about, especially since I'm not sourcing anything else I've written in the articles...so, no, how would this be conflict of interest?  Considering I have input on many articles, and have only written my first, there's no personal conflict of interest either. Notable? I suppose that reference is to that same first article... it's a person in the news who is absolutely notable - and more of a notable and historical figure than some of his peers who are in wiki!  So, really, I mean no offense toward Max or anyone, but that's kind of a silly question.  Why would someone write about someone who isn't notable or a public figure?  Who would read the article?  So, bottom-line, please forgive me for wiki-ignorance - I did the best I could to try to get started. Sorry to have not done it in the right way. And frankly, I'm not sure I have much motivation to try to do this again.  But, at least, if someone can change my username or possibly help me do it, I'd appreciate it so I can at least still edit on other articles. I really just want the bludgeoning to be over! ("...bludgeoning..." is meant tongue in cheek)  Lauren AnglicanChaplains (talk) 04:13, 3 January 2013 (UTC)
 * Ok, see the instructions above for where to change your username. If you have trouble, I'm still watching right here.  I had to laugh at your question (no not at you) "Why would someone write about someone who isn't notable or a public figure?" ... we have delete literally DOZENS of articles on a daily basis about non-notable individuals - sometimes it's pure vanity, sometimes people think this is Facebook, or sometimes people simply don't read/don't understand notability (✉→BWilkins←✎) 12:39, 3 January 2013 (UTC)

Bwilkins, thank you for the email but I don't know where I cut and paste that into in order to request the name change. I need to do this before someone decides to block me again. Where do I cut and paste that page direction to and then indicate I need my username changed? LaurenAnglicanChaplains (talk) 14:27, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Help
Ok, first step is to highlight the text immediately below and copy it:

~

Now, click here and scroll to the very very bottom of the edit window, then paste what you copied above. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 14:47, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Done... Thank you bwilkinsAnglicanChaplains (talk) 03:43, 10 January 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bishop Derek LS Jones concern
Hi there, I'm HasteurBot. I just wanted to let you know that Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bishop Derek LS Jones, a page you created, has not been edited in 6 months. The Articles for Creation space is not an indefinite storage location for content that is not appropriate for articlespace.

If your submission is not edited soon, it could be nominated for deletion. If you would like to attempt to save it, you will need to improve it.

You may request Userfication of the content if it meets requirements.

If the deletion has already occured, instructions on how you may be able to retrieve it are available at WP:REFUND/G13.

Thank you for your attention. HasteurBot (talk) 02:09, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Some updates are needed and I will get the information this week. Bishop Jones has become a diocene bishop, which is a big deal. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.85.32.175 (talk) 16:52, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Your draft article, Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bishop Derek LS Jones


Hello ChaplainLoo. It has been over six months since you last edited your WP:AFC draft article submission, entitled "Bishop Derek LS Jones".

The page will shortly be deleted. If you plan on editing the page to address the issues raised when it was declined and resubmit it, simply and remove the  or  code. Please note that Articles for Creation is not for indefinite hosting of material deemed unsuitable for the encyclopedia mainspace.

If your submission has already been deleted by the time you get there, and you want to retrieve it, copy this code:, paste it in the edit box at this link , click "Save", and an administrator will in most cases undelete the submission.

Thanks for your submission to Wikipedia, and happy editing. &mdash;Anne Delong (talk) 14:13, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

The page has been deleted. I'm not wiki savvy and didn't realize when we changed the name of the article that the old draft remained. Please forgive ChaplainLoo (talk) 19:42, 27 January 2014 (UTC)ChaplainLoo