User talk:DNAHustisya

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 does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. Thank you. Alexf(talk) 13:02, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

The name's OK, but consider this query as well:

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. Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 21 January 2014 (UTC)

Feel free to delete my contributions. Regardless, my user name is no longer in conflict with your rules and I am not a repeat offender so kindly unblock it.

Your house, your rules. However, I would appreciate your applying them consistently. I read the posting rules and believe my contributions are in compliance. Honestly, those of us who are not consumed by Wikipedia tend to learn by example rather than deeply studying and debating the rules. It is that way in most communities. And it drives mods nuts. Especially when they forget that the medium is not the message for those that simply want to contribute rather than become experts in the medium itself.

My contributions are consistent with long-standing existing articles on this very subject along with being useful and accurate. Why pick on us? Visit Ref 13 and 15 for example.

If anyone knows about the difference between written rules and actual practices it is those of us who reside in the Philippines. So please stop picking on me. Wikipedia is Wikipedia and our posts and references are consistent with the practices. We should not throw the baby out with the bathwater!

More important to me was that:


 * My postings are helpful and accurate. I recently spoke with a Judge here who actually believes that the Philippines judiciary does not respect DNA evidence. Try arguing with a Judge!


 * The references are helpful and accurate. The fact that we offer DNA tests on our site does not make the reference material provided there any less valid or our contributions any less scholarly. The IEEE and many other esteemed organizations do the same.


 * Our contributions are consistent with other long-standing existing ones such ref 13 and 15. And about a million more elsewhere in Wikipedia.


 * I selected my original user name because I felt it most transparent. To have used a more personal name seemed akin to shill bidding.

We did not mention that we are the lowest cost source of DNA relationship and forensic testing in the pinas. Maybe one day we will not be. The DNA Hustisya Project lives for the day when we are NOT the lowest price source for DNA relationship and forensic services in the Philippines. Our contribution is valid either way because we constantly survey the marketplace here and make that survey available to the public (ref 18). We are shoulder-deep in the legal issues regarding paternity and DNA evidence in general. Hence reference 19.

The DNA Hustisya Project is about to launch an assault on sexual assault in a country that has no rape kits and babies of incestuous relationships abound. We have more than enough on our plate. Please do not turn our good intentions into a fulltime job for us.

I only have 2G internet due to Typhoon Yolanda cutting our landlines so cannot go round and round on this. Kindly change my user name to one that is in keeping with your rules and then edit my contributions as you see fit. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 121.54.44.135 (talk) 20:40, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

I have email of Jan 23, 2014 4:41AM Manila time saying there is new info on this page. However I do not see any updates. Please make this simple for us. We only have 2G internet and it took half an hour to check and double-check. How should we proceed? — Preceding unsigned comment added by DNAHustisya (talk • contribs)


 * Note: I am in the process of repairing your request, and reviewing.
 * First note that we only accept unblocks and related comments from the logged in user
 * You got notification (which you can turn off, by the way) of an edit because when you did not sign your last post, an automated bot did it for you - hence the edit notiication
 * Any time you comment on a talkpage, you must sign it with 4 tildes like this:  ~ 
 * Your comments show that you have failed to read the 3 key policies that Daniel Case pointed out: each one has a link to a POLICY that you may not violate. Your responses must address those because, as you say, "your house, your rules", and you agreed to edit according to those rules
 * To make it simple: these plain and simple conflict of interest rules will guide you
 * Finally, please read WP:NOBLECAUSE - although your organization may do important work, it might not be a suitable topic for an international encyclopedia of knowledge
 * I am watching this page for your replies, and please ensure that you have read and understood all the linked policies before proceeding - although I recognize your good faith attempts, those policies are not optional D  P  11:59, 1 February 2014 (UTC)