User talk:JohnD-37LFS

February 2019
There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth 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 that reason, you must:
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of 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 at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 05:27, 18 February 2019 (UTC)

MillersPointCommunity (talk) 06:47, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Evidently two other John Dunns beat you to registering similar usernames; you will need to choose something else. No need to make a second request; you may simply replace your original choice with your new one. You will also need to read about conflict of interest which will explain why you should avoid directly editing about your building(you may make edit requests). 331dot (talk) 08:01, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Username is available. What you mean by "two others"?  Please, convince us that you understand the WP:COI.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  16:42, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * When I tried to change it the system came back that there was two similar names. 331dot (talk) 17:03, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * There are and . The first made no edits, while the second made two, both now deleted. Thus, requested username is fine per WP:UPOL (Usernames that are similar only to unused or inactive accounts should not be a problem.).  Vanjagenije   (talk)  17:09, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * That's not what I got back, a "John Dunn and a "Johndunn". I must go away from my device for a bit, if you wish to change it, please do so with my best wishes. 331dot (talk) 17:13, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

MillersPointCommunity (talk) 00:01, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Please, do not post new unblock requests while the first one is still under review. Instead, you can make comments without the "unblock" template. Regarding your understanding of the conflict of interest, you are not convincing me that you understand it. First you say that there is no conflict of interest, but than you say that you are interested in the history and heritage of our house, our street, our neighbourhood and our community. But, writing about your house is the definition of the conflict of interest. Can you describe me how you understand the Conflict of interest (WP:COI) as defined by Wikipedia?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  00:51, 21 February 2019 (UTC)

Sorry I do not know the ins and outs of Wikipedia procedures regarding how to continue discussion and am not intending to begin a new request while an existing one is active. Reading the Wikipedia definition of conflict of interest, it refers to "contributing to Wikipedia about yourself, family, friends, clients, employers, or your financial and other relationships." This is not the same as an interest in historic areas, buildings or houses. Most people who live in an historic area, building or house, consider themselves custodians of those areas, buildings or houses, and they have an obligation to research and share information about those historic areas, buildings or houses. I notice that someone has posted material I have produced on the Sirius Building in the Wikipedia entry (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sirius_building), and they were welcome to do so (see notes 1 and 2 for links to the material I wrote). In the future I would propose adding to this article about this historic building in our neighbourhood, but would not connect to the book on this building as this could be considered a conflict of interest (See https://piperpress.com.au/), even though this book was written and published by members of the Save Our Sirius Foundation to tell the story of this building. In all other ways I do not have a conflict of interest in relation to Sirius; I do have an interest in Sirius. Similarly, under current restrictions, it is up to someone else to enter our home Dawesleigh (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dawesleigh) on the Millers Point Wikipedia entry which includes all neighbouring houses (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Millers_Point,_New_South_Wales). Its omission is not to do with heritage significance but with how the information is configured. MillersPointCommunity (talk) 05:38, 21 February 2019 (UTC) Thank you for following up on this. I will abide by your conditions. By the way, the website I produce aims to do the opposite of this Wikipedia rule, encouraging the residents of local heritage properties to write about where they live – their houses, buildings and neighbourhood. Whether or not what they produce is better than other material is for others to decide. If the block is deleted, let me know new username but please don't re-enter any of the editing that was deleted as some of it represents original research which I would prefer to publish elsewhere first. MillersPointCommunity (talk) 22:35, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Would you object to unblock? If you own an apartment in the said building, it might be seen as a conflict of interest because you then own part of the building (so you have "financial and other relationships"). That means that you have financial interest to portray the building positively. But, I agree that this is the border case and I don't think you should be blocked. I just want you to understand the issue.  Vanjagenije   (talk)  18:39, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
 * If the user is renamed and will refrain from adding links to their website (example), then unblocking is ok with me. —&thinsp;JJMC89&thinsp; (T·C) 02:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Do you agree with set conditions for unblocking?  Vanjagenije  (talk)  13:36, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I unblocked you. You have to request username change yourself (See the explanation above). Your proposed username should be fine. If you have any problems in the process, feel free to contact me on my talk page. And, be aware that Wikipedia does not allow spamming any links, regardless of the purpose of the site.  Vanjagenije  (talk)  19:44, 23 February 2019 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for your advice. It appears all edits have been deleted and there is no earlier history to save. There might be a long inactive account with our house name that I can access. A few simple edits coming soon. MillersPointCommunity (talk) 01:34, 24 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Are those two accounts also yours: and ?  Vanjagenije   (talk)  22:38, 24 February 2019 (UTC)

Your attention needed at WP:CHU
Hello. A renamer or clerk has responded to your username change request, but requires clarification before moving forward. Please follow up at your username change request entry as soon as possible. Thank you. ‐‐1997kB (talk) 03:55, 24 February 2019 (UTC)