User talk:JMoore501

Plants for Human Health Institute article
Thanks for your message on my talk page. Usually, I reply to messages there, because conversations that jump back and forth between two talk pages can be horrendously difficult to follow. However, this time I have decided to reply here, as it may be more helpful to you if what I say is on your own talk page, in case you want to refer back to it.

First of all, you say "I want to apologize for my seeming lack of regard for Wikipedia's policies". No apology is necessary, as far as I am concerned. Almost everybody, when they first edit Wikipedia, knows little or nothing about Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, and makes mistakes. I certainly did so, so I can scarcely blame others for doing likewise. In fact, my personal opinion is that Wikipedia would be far better if we cut out about 90% of the policies and guidelines, which would make the whole thing less daunting for newcomers. However, my task as a Wikipedia administrator is to administer the policies as they are, not as I would like them to be.

Technically, you have made another infringement of Wikipedia's policies, by simply creating a new account, rather than requesting an unblock, as explained on the talk page of your original account. I could simply block this account too, but I am not doing so, because what you have said on my talk page makes it clear that your intentions for the way forward are constructive. It is essential, however, that you avoid giving the impression that you are using this account for promotional purposes, or it may yet be blocked.

I have restored the content of the article at User:JMoore501/Plants for Human Health Institute. The advantage of putting it there, rather than back at Plants for Human Health Institute, is that you should be allowed more leeway while you work on it, with less risk of its being speedily deleted before you have got it ready. That does not mean that it can stay indefinitely in its present state: this is a temporary measure to allow time for improvement, with a view to eventually returning it to Plants for Human Health Institute when it is ready. (Just in case you come across someone using Wikipedia jargon in connection with this, a page with a title beginning User:JMoore501/... is known as a page in your "userspace", and the process of moving a page to a userspace is called "userfying" it.)

You say "After re-reading the original content ... I ... realize how subjective the content appeared (though that wasn't my intention)." It is surprisingly difficult to stand back from a subject that you have a close personal involvement in, and write objectively about it. Even people who clearly genuinely do not intend to write in a promotional way about businesses or other organisations they are connected to often genuinely cannot see how promotional their writing will look to others. I have known people edit and re-edit an article to remove the impression of promotion, being told over and over again that it still looks like promotion, until they eventually become totally frustrated and disillusioned with Wikipedia. (And I am referring here to people who have the best intentions, not those who come here with the intention of using Wikipedia for spamming.) This is one of the main reasons why Wikipedia's conflict of interest guidelines discourage us from writing articles about subjects in which we have a personal involvement. Personally, I would not encourage any insider in an organisation to create an article about it, but if you choose to try re-editing the page to make it more suitable then you should be very careful. You ask me to review the page when you have edited it. Please do contact me when you have done so, and I will give you my opinion, and if I am in any doubt I will seek a third opinion. I would strongly recommend that you don't move the page back from userspace to article space yourself, because of the conflict of interest issue.

You have indicated on my talk page that you have a position which might be considered to give a conflict of interest, and also that you had a previous account which was blocked. I suggest that you should declare these two facts either on this talk page, or, perhaps better, on your user page. (You haven't got a user page yet, but you can create it at User:JMoore501.) This will avoid any risk of anyone thinking you have anything to hide. It is clear to me that you haven't, but it will do no harm to make it clear to everyone that you are open about the situation. JamesBWatson (talk) 10:20, 15 January 2013 (UTC)

Transparency, the best policy
Greetings, and thanks for visiting my Talk page. As of this post (20 January 2013) I'm still a "newbie" to Wikipedia, and as such I think it's important that I be totally transparent with editors, administrators et al. about my background and intentions on Wikipedia. In short, as I'd like to think is the case with many folks during their initial adventures in Wikiland, I made a few snafus right out of the gate. My first account was clearly an organization-related username, which resulted in a speedy deletion by an administrator. In addition, I used that account to create an article about the organization of which I'm a part; not necessarily a crime, but the article was a little too self-promotional and was also deleted the first go round. The bumpy start gave me a newfound respect for Wikipedia and the editors working to make it as valuable a resource as possible. I learned, adjusted and am doing things the right way now. I'm still developing an article for the organization I work for, but in a manner consistent with Wikipedia's policies and in cooperation with the deleting administrator via my userspace. Thus, any potential "conflict of interest" issues are avoided and information about this noteworthy organization can still be made available on Wikipedia. I want to be open about my less-than-flattering beginnings so as not to give the impression that I'm hiding anything or abusing the system; simply not the case. Please feel free to contact me with questions or concerns regarding my edits, or just to chat. Cheers! JMoore501 (talk) 03:51, 21 January 2013 (UTC)JMoore501

The completed article: Plants for Human Health Institute. JMoore501 (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2013 (UTC)JMoore501