User talk:ModernChurch

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, ModernChurch. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you have an external relationship with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:


 * Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
 * Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam).
 * Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies. Note that Wikipedia's terms of use require disclosure of your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Theroadislong (talk) 22:12, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames which 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. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. 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. Alexf(talk) 23:29, 11 August 2015 (UTC)


 * By "experienced difficulty" do you mean you've forgotten the password and you either don't have an email address associated with the account or the email address is deprecated? If so, then you may be out of luck with Baronhankie - admins don't have any specialised access to user records (especially sensitive ones like passwords) and cannot reset passwords. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 09:19, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * As Jeremy says, we can't reactivate any accounts. Only you can do that, by remembering your password. Peridon (talk) 12:08, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * There has never been a user called User:Baronhankie ? Theroadislong (talk) 12:11, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Yes, there has. No user page or user talk page, but if you Search for 'user talk:Baronhankie' and then click on the red 'Create this page' you will see 'User contributions' at the left of the page. A few edits in 2009 and one in 2011. It is awkward when there is no user page or user talk, but this trick usually works. Peridon (talk) 13:15, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Three comments: 1 - I want to ask again for a change of name - I did not understand the username policy re organisation names, otherwise I would have chosen a different name. I do not intend to share this account with others. 2 - I have requested a new password for my old account 'Baronhankie' and received no email with a reset link despite repeated attempts. I contacted the Wikipedia Information Team (Ticket #2015072010015398) and did not resolve the issue. 3 - Is it really necessary for me to start again with a third account when one of these could be re-enabled? Thank you.
 * You need to provide the username you want in the unblock request (i.e. change it from "new username" to the username you want). Note that because it has edits, Baronhankie isn't going to be a possibility.
 * And from what you're saying, either the email address is deprecated or your email client is putting such requests in the junk folder or otherwise filtering them out. Check your Junk folder. — Jeremy  v^_^v  Bori! 21:30, 12 August 2015 (UTC)


 * If you are successful in getting unblocked I would strongly suggest that you do not edit the article directly but make suggestions on the talk page for others to consider. Theroadislong (talk) 23:04, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you - I understand all the issues that have been raised. Can you please arrange for my account to be unblocked so I can continue to use the site without having to start all over again.ModernChurch (talk) 23:37, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

As no-one has responded to my request to change username and unblock this account for 24 hours, I am surrendering this account. Please ignore previous rename request. Thank you.ModernChurch (talk) 22:13, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
 * ModernChurch, I would recommend against opening up a new account since there has been some attempt to unblock you here. Unblocking is not an immediate process, so you just need to be patient. Some unblock requests take weeks to finish because we want to make sure that you understand everything before unblocking you. In any case, the reason I don't want you to just abandon this and create a new account is because I want to make sure that you're aware of some stuff concerning a conflict of interest. Since it looks like you are editing with a conflict of interest (WP:COI) you will need to be very, VERY careful about editing since you may write something in a promotional tone without meaning to. What you will need to do is just sort of give us a bit of reassurance that you are aware of Wikipedia's policies and will be careful about how you edit. So far I haven't seen anything overwhelmingly bad, mostly all you're doing is just replacing links. However at the same time I do need to warn you that the page also has issues with notability, so if/when you are unblocked (and so far I don't see any particular reason not to, other than you not giving us a new username just yet) you'll need to show where this organization has received coverage in independent and reliable sources like newspaper articles. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  09:59, 22 August 2015 (UTC)
 * Ah - I do see where you've requested one above. Can you choose something that's a little more neutral? That still gives off a big COI "editing for an organization" vibe. While you are editing for an organization, the username should be more neutral in tone. You can choose something like "Suzy at Modern Church", though. That's fine since it does show that you're editing as one person rather than as a group. The only coda is that whatever username you do end up with, you must disclose your COI on your userpage. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)  10:01, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Tokyogirl79 Thank you for your reply. I have already set up a new account using the name I requested as a name change above. The name I have chosen is nothing to do with the Modern Church organisation, it relates to the name of my personal blog and twitter account. I was working on resolving the conflict and notability issues when my account was blocked. I have asked others who can help with external sources to review the article, and I only intend to edit it now if they need help with formatting their content.ModernChurch (talk) 20:49, 24 August 2015 (UTC)