User talk:Laurieshaw8

May 2011
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia, as you did to Coffee Beanery with this edit, without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. —S MALL JIM   16:19, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to blank out or remove portions of page content, templates or other materials from Wikipedia, as you did at Coffee Beanery with this edit, you may be blocked from editing. Breawycker (talk to me!) Review Me! 16:22, 15 May 2011 (UTC) You have been indefinitely blocked from editing for Vandalism. If you feel this block is unjustified, you may contest it by adding the text below. —S MALL JIM   16:24, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

Some of the material you removed was a bit non-neutral, and could probably have been reworked or edited to comply with our policies - but the problem wasn't that you wanted the material removed. The problem was that you just kept removing it without discussion. There might be perfectly reasonable edits to be made, but no one would know because you did not discuss your reasoning. Your request here raises another question, though - are you affiliated with or editing on behalf of the Coffee Beanery? UltraExactZZ Said~ Did 17:09, 28 January 2013 (UTC)


 * Considering that the founders of the company wee "JoAnne and Julius Shaw", I would expect that the answer (based on the name Laurie Shaw) is "yes". Laurie, please be aware of conflict of interest as you edit Wikipedia.  (✉→BWilkins←✎) 17:15, 28 January 2013 (UTC)

Laurie, as you were blocked for vandalism after only a couple of edits, and I understand that you believe you were doing the "right thing" for a family-owned business, there is a way forward. I would personally consider unblocking you if you are able to show that you fully understand conflict of interest. Even the founder of Wikipedia recently re-stated that those from companies should not edit their articles due to COI. At the same time, you might want to read WP:UNDUE and WP:NPOV - I believe that you were trying to remove items from the article that actually were being given undue weight. Although people with COI should typically only edit the talkpage of the article to suggest changes in order to gain wP:CONSENSUS, editors may remove unsourced negative information. It's a grey areas as to whether or not the sources being used were WP:UNDUE, and as such it would have been wiser to follow our dispute resolution processes in order to correct undue/npov issues. If you have a read of the policies I have linked to, and let us know your understanding of them - plus how you'll move forward in the future, a wandering admin (possibly even me) will re-review the information and be able to make a better decision as to the unblock (✉→BWilkins←✎) 13:07, 30 January 2013 (UTC)