User talk:JackForCommonCause

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. Please read the following carefully.

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.
 * Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Probably not, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again.
 * Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?


 * What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead. If you do intend to make useful contributions here about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:


 * Add the text on your user talk page.
 * Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
 * Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
 * 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 you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal this block by adding the text below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  11:28, 22 July 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. (✉→BWilkins ←✎) 16:38, 22 July 2013 (UTC)

I understand what Wikipedia is for and I do still consider the charity I work for notable, and that it will become more note worthy as time goes by. I understand why I was blocked, my username choice was an attempt to be open and transparent about why I was writing the post. I do not profit from the wikipedia page, I was not intending to promote the charity mearly inform people that it exists and what it does. (Jack)


 * Are you saying that it's your intent to continue to write contrary to WP:COI? (✉→BWilkins ←✎) 14:58, 23 July 2013 (UTC)

No not at all. If you decide I should not continue writing I will of course not seek to have anything more to do with the wikipedia community. All I wanted to do was to inform people about the charity I work for and what we do. I understand now that this was not the right way to go about it. Is there another way that an article could be written about the charity, by for example, a third party? I guess my question is; Is the problem with the tone of the article, its contents or the fact that I set up a username that referenced the name of the charity? (Jack) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.149.202.103 (talk) 15:13, 23 July 2013 (UTC)


 * Oh, we do want people to edit Wikipedia. Some day when the charity meets our extremely strict notability requirements, someone unrelated to the organization - and of course, not prompted by the organization - will write a great little article.  You, as someone involved in that charity will be able to proudly suggest changes on its talkpage, linking to reliable sources, and truly assisting in the creation of a fine little article.  However, that day is far off, primarily from the notability angle at this time - that is currently the primary problem with the article as a whole (✉→BWilkins ←✎) 10:02, 25 July 2013 (UTC)