User talk:Law Commission England and Wales

September 2014
Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy. It also appears that your account is intended to be used for the purpose of telling the world about an organization, person or cause that you consider worthwhile. Unfortunately, many good causes are not sufficiently notable for their own Wikipedia article, and all users are discouraged from editing in any area where they have an inherent conflict of interest. You may wish to consider one of these alternative outlets. If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text below this notice. Thank you. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?  17:19, 18 September 2014 (UTC)

OK, that name's fine. But as a solicitors' group you will no doubt be able to appreciate that we have some further inquiries:

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. Daniel Case (talk)

Hello. Yes, I do understand that Wikipedia is not a business directory and that you need to protect its integrity. However, the Law Commission is a public body and it is important that the information that is in the public domain about the Commission is correct. My aim is to ensure accuracy, not to promote the Commission. Incidentally, the Law Commission is included in the GCSE and A-level syllabuses and the Wikipedia entry is likely to be used as a source by many students. I do absolutely understand conflict of interest but am interested only in making sure the entry is accurate and up to date, and so of greater value to users. For example, we will have a new Law Commissioner in January. I would like to be able to add their name to the entry when the time comes. I hope I have convinced you that my intentions are honourable!


 * Hello. I've unblocked you for the purpose of seeking a rename. I believe WP:CHUS is the page you want - we trust you to go there forthwith. I wish to add some further comments, just so we're clear after the rename. Firstly and foremost, nobody here accepts any implicit or explicit claims of who you are or who you represent. You wouldn't believe the number of times I've seen Bill Gates, or some representative of an ISP company, here. Not only that, we do not care who you are or who you may claim to represent - you have no authority over anyone to make any edits or assurances. So although you should be open and transparent, neither should you wield these attributes about. After that, we fully welcome responsible editors who wish to keep Wikipedia's articles not-outdated and free from vandalism and inaccuracies, as well as provide pointers to additional useful news and content. However, one word of caution - if you understand objectivity and neutrality, and I should hope you do - beware the unusual trap of adding too much of either, as it can be seen as a violation of both. -- zzuuzz (talk) 08:24, 4 October 2014 (UTC)