User talk:Jeannie7749

Welcome!
Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. The following links will help you begin editing on Wikipedia:
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * Contributing to Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Editing tutorial
 * Picture tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Naming conventions
 * Simplified Manual of Style

Please bear these points in mind while editing Wikipedia:
 * Respect copyrights – do not copy and paste text or images directly from other websites.
 * Maintain a neutral point of view – this is one of Wikipedia's core policies.
 * Take particular care while adding biographical material about a living person to any Wikipedia page and follow Wikipedia's Biography of Living Persons policy. Particularly, controversial and negative statements should be referenced with multiple reliable sources.
 * No edit warring or abuse of multiple accounts.
 * If you are testing, please use the Sandbox to [ do so].
 * Do not add troublesome content to any article, such as: copyrighted text, libel, advertising or promotional messages, and text that is not related to an article's subject; doing so will result in your account or IP being blocked from editing.
 * Do not use talk pages as discussion or forum pages as Wikipedia is not a forum.

The Wikipedia tutorial is a good place to start learning about Wikipedia. If you have any questions, see the help pages, add a question to the village pump or ask me on my talk page. By the way, you can sign your name on Talk and discussion pages using four tildes, like this: &#126;&#126;&#126;&#126; (the software will replace them with your signature and the date). Again, welcome! Pam D  18:10, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

August 2019
Hello, I'm Vif12vf. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Socialist Health Association have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 19:48, 1 August 2019 (UTC) Please identify the authority under which you are editing changes to the Socialist Health Association page. I am unsure under what criteria you have reached the decision the new content is promotional. I understood that there had to be a discussion prior to undoing an edit. I did not undo any previous material, just updated it. I am also not sure how correcting previous de facto vandalism, which was not authorised by the officers of the organisation is deemed promotional. Links to current officers are on the page on the same basis as links to important members,which were in the original edit and still are. The writing is objective, and factual, and mostly refers to a response to a government green paper. I am disturbed by this level of interest, since we are hardly promoting our organisation simply by informing people about academic papers, or a more current list of leading members,. Furthermore if there is any more re-editing which results in the page reverting to information which has been refuted and is widely discredited now, with the organisation complaining to Private Eye that its content was frankly actionable, I will complain to the relevant people that this is editorial vandalism on your part. In short, you have given me no indication of any sections you consider promotional. I am open to considering any changes which are specific and reasonable. Jean Hardiman Smith (Socialist Health Association Hon Sec) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeannie7749 (talk • contribs) 21:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)


 * The links provided should be third-party sources. Different leaders should not be listed like this in the middle of the article and links should not simply be inserted like you are doing. Reading about wikipedia guidelines is highly important before doing any editing! Vif12vf/Tiberius (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2019 (UTC)

I can make the appropriate changes, however the current link to the Chair was not authorised and contains a number of allegations which are malicious and unfounded. I am astounded that it is OK to spread a lie, as long as you quote the source of the lie,having previously fed it to that source(made good copy) but not OK to put a list of people in the wrong section. I will recategories as suggested in the morning. pd I find the instructions pretty opaque, and did my best to follow. I am sure I will get there in the end. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeannie7749 (talk • contribs) 01:21, 2 August 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I'm PamD. I noticed that you recently removed content from Alex Scott-Samuel without adequately explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the removed content has been restored. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Please do not remove sourced content without any explanation. Pam  D  18:09, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Jeannie7749. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page Socialist Health Association, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the COI guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
 * avoid linking to your organization's website in other articles (see WP:Spam);
 * do your best to comply with Wikipedia's content policies.

In addition, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution which forms all or part of work for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. '' As the association's honorary secretary you should not be editing its article as you have a "Conflict of Interest" in Wikipedia's terms. If you have suggestions for improvements to the article, please provide these, with sources, on the article's talk page.'' Pam  D  18:25, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Pam, I am unpaid by anyone. I have never referred to anything the SHA did which was not a policy paper, and as such in the public domain, and sent to parliamentary paries etc. The SHA gets paid for nothing we do. We are totally non profit making and have no current paid people in the staff. I therefore don't seetthe conflict of interest, as our reputation is traduced publicly on your pages. Please see below for more information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeannie7749 (talk • contribs) 20:01, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Signing comments
Hallo Jean, please remember to sign comments, even on your own talk page, with your Wikipedia editor name, and add the date and time - the easiest way to do so is just to type  which both signs and dates. It makes it much easier for other editors to follow discussions on talk pages. Thanks. Pam D  18:31, 4 August 2019 (UTC)

Hi Pam,

I have sent an email explaining what has happened. The original articles including the Socialist Health and Alex Scott-Samual were published by a disgruntled ex-employee with the express purpose of bringing down both the Chair (maybe especially the chair) and the organisation, and as such cannot have complied with most of your guidelines, yet were allowed to stand unchallenged it seems. Moreover some of this content is libellous. Since the ex-director published unchallenged, I would see you as having a duty of care to establish the truth, and have pared the article back to the bare facts. I am sorry if I am sounding pretty disgruntled, but truth to tell I am. It would seem you are arguing that this libellous material stays until some party with no conection not only knows the truth but is engaged enough to change the pages involved. Please therefore remove both pages, or allow the bare facts to stand,and I am really sorry, but I am feeling like I am going round in circles over this.

Jean — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeannie 7749 (talk • contribs) 18:56, 4 August 2019 (UTC)


 * Jean, please read and act on my advice above about signing your posts. Thanks. Pam  D  14:33, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Your edit- not what you intended?
Hallo Jean, Your edit summary here suggests that you intended to do more than just revert Anomiebot's addition of a date to a tag. Pam D  14:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)


 * I have removed the final paragraph of the "History" section, which I guess is what you were trying to do. Pam  D  15:17, 9 August 2019 (UTC)

Thank you Pam, I understand what you are saying, and it is what I am saying too. Unfortunately the employee was not happy with the ACAS decision, and took to informing Private Eye, and so we got caught up in the Labour Party anti Semetism issue. I too am completely fed up with this infighting, and just want to get on with my job, however if a magazine prints lies, that is not a good reason to accept them as truth which the so called reputable media have done (suits a political purpose). More than one person was hurt and I am totally sick of the whole thing. Is there any way to just lock the page? Private Eye were advised as to why the alllegations were made and asked not to repeat them, which they have not. I am not trying to infer that you, or Wiki have done anything wrong, but I don't feel it is journalisms finest hour at the moment, I don't want to need to do anything else on here - once we are locked you won't see me again :)
 * Jean, Why are you still not signing your edits? Pam  D  22:48, 10 August 2019 (UTC)

Sorry, I am in the middle of an Addisons/hypo sugar level issue, and forgot. I get bad brain fog in a crisis Jeannie7749 (talk) 22:52, 10 August 2019 (UTC) Jean


 * Ah, sorry to hear that. It sounds a nasty ailment. And I see you do now know how to sign posts.
 * On "locking" the page: it's very rare for a page to be fully "protected" as you'd like: no-one owns a page or has a right to determine its content. Just keep it "watchlisted", and make any changes with full edit summary or make comments on talk page. Pam  D  06:27, 11 August 2019 (UTC)