User talk:Paulwalsh13

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Paulwalsh13. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


 * avoid editing or creating articles about yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization or competitors;
 * propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles (you can use the request edit template);
 * disclose your conflict of interest when discussing affected articles (see Conflict of interest);
 * 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 are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. ~  Araratic  &#124; talk  10:22, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

Ivanhoe Grammar School
You managed to break the top of the page in your efforts to remove fully cited content. Please refrain from doing so. The content has also been restored. GraziePrego (talk) 07:16, 10 August 2023 (UTC)

Ivanhoe Grammar School
Hello, Paulwalsh13. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a conflict of interest may be unduly influenced by their connection to the topic. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. We ask that you:


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

In addition, you are required by the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use to 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 Paid-contribution disclosure.

Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. GraziePrego (talk) 00:39, 11 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit warring- Ivanhoe Grammar School
You currently appear to be engaged in an edit war. This means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be although other editors disagree. Users are expected to collaborate with others, to avoid editing disruptively, and to try to reach a consensus, rather than repeatedly undoing other users' edits once it is known that there is a disagreement.

Points to note: If you find yourself in an editing dispute, use the article's talk page to discuss controversial changes and work towards a version that represents consensus among editors. You can post a request for help at an appropriate noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, it may be appropriate to request temporary page protection. If you engage in an edit war, you may be blocked from editing. GraziePrego (talk) 01:38, 14 August 2023 (UTC)
 * 1) Edit warring is disruptive regardless of how many reverts you have made;
 * 2) Do not edit war even if you believe you are right.

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion
Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. Thank you. GraziePrego (talk) 03:04, 14 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I am definitely not being compensated for my edits. My edits just make plain sense. You cannot write a comment that states " The Independent Education Union was to argue that a....... " because they never did!!  If that's the case, anyone can presuppose any statement or action without it actually happening and without any concrete evidence that it was ever going to happen. It is common sense......and therefore the claim should be removed, which I am attempting to do.   Paulwalsh13 (talk) 11:27, 16 August 2023 (UTC)

August 2023
 You have been blocked from editing from certain pages (Ivanhoe Grammar School) for a period of 2 weeks for Ivanhoe Grammar School. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Aoidh (talk) 12:16, 14 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello Paulwalsh13. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Ivanhoe Grammar School, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are  required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Paulwalsh13. The template Paid can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form:. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Aoidh (talk) 12:29, 14 August 2023 (UTC)


 * I am definitely not being compensated for my edits. My edits just make plain sense. You cannot write a comment that states " The Independent Education Union was to argue that a....... " because they never did!!  If that's the case, anyone can presuppose any statement or action without it actually happening and without any concrete evidence that it was ever going to happen. It is common sense......and therefore the claim should be removed, which I am attempting to do.   Paulwalsh13 (talk) 11:26, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
 * First of all, if you are an employee of Ivanhoe Grammar in any sense, then by definition you are being compensated for your edits. If you are editing on behalf of your employer, then that would not be allowed.
 * Secondly, the statement “the union was to argue” is entirely factual. They were going to argue that. Whether it happened or not is immaterial- it is correct to say they were going to argue that. The multiple citations contained within the paragraph you kept removing confirm this.
 * Thirdly, you have not acknowledged in the slightest that every single edit you have made to Ivanhoe Grammar School has been an attempt to either remove negative content or insert marketing material, something which was raised on the edit warring noticeboard where you were reported. GraziePrego (talk) 11:50, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
 * "Whether it happened or not is immaterial- it is correct to say they were going to argue that" With all due respect, GraziePrego that statement is rubbish!!! You can prove if something actually happened, there is no evidence within the paragraph to verify that something 'might' have happened. I could go  onto any site and pontificate that something was going to happen but never did!!  "Guitarist Jimmy Strings was going to sexually attack one of his backing singers, but decided not to!"  Fact It didn't happen.  Unable to be prove He was going to do it. GraziePrego, flawed arguments are great to challenge but honestly, yours is just a little bit too easy!!!  (God, I hope you're not a lawyer! But if you are I'm happy to donate to your starving family! ) Paulwalsh13 (talk) 10:28, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I mean it's more funny than insulting but I doubt it's within MOS:CIVILITY for Paulwalsh13 to use that tone in this discussion?
 * I should also note that my apparently-flawed arguments have the support of admins, and you are now appropriately permanently prevented from wreaking havoc on Ivanhoe Grammar School. GraziePrego (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2023 (UTC)
 * beware the new identity!! :) Paulwalsh13 (talk) 01:48, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Absolutely no idea what you're trying to say with that. Are you suggesting you're trying to make another account to start editing Ivanhoe Grammar School again? Very quick and obvious way to get banned again lmao GraziePrego (talk) 02:31, 19 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I have to stress that creating a new account to circumvent a block is sockpuppetry and it will be very easy to figure out if you are using such an account to edit that article, not only from the nature of the edits themselves but by technical means. If that happens, this account and that account will be fully blocked indefinitely and any edits you make using that alternate account will be reverted, meaning the only thing that will happen is that you will lose the ability to edit Wikipedia in its entirety, rather than just that one page. You would be unable to use the article's talk page to suggest improvements to the article, and would have no say in what happens to the article, so the only editor that should beware the new identity!! is yourself, if that is indeed what that means. The edits you make with that sockpuppet account would not remain in the article, so there is no upside to using a sockpuppet account to circumvent this block, only a downside. My suggestion would be to use the article's talk page, suggest some improvements or provide some sources for some of the statements in the article (the article from what I'm seeing badly needs sources, or those statements lacking citations may be removed, including most of the history section) and after a while of that perhaps request an unblock using the instructions below so that you may be able to edit the page again. If you truly want to improve the article, provide some sources for some of the unsourced content in the article on the article's talk page. - Aoidh (talk) 08:34, 19 August 2023 (UTC)

 You have been blocked indefinitely from editing certain pages (Ivanhoe Grammar School) for promotional editing. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page:. Aoidh (talk) 12:51, 16 August 2023 (UTC) Looking at the history of your contributions on Wikipedia, all of them have been to the page Ivanhoe Grammar School and all of them have been explicit in either adding promotional material or removing non-positive information. Because of this I have indefinitely blocked you from being able to edit that article due to this promotional editing. I have not blocked your account from any other page on Wikipedia, including Talk:Ivanhoe Grammar School, specifically so that you may propose changes per Conflict of interest: COI editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, and can propose changes on article talk pages instead. You may use the talk page directly or may use Edit Request Wizard to make edit requests. Please note that any attempt to log out to make edits to Ivanhoe Grammar School, or to create a sockpuppet account to make any edits will result in a full block from Wikipedia which will remove your ability to use the article's talk page to propose changes to the article, and those edits would be reverted. - Aoidh (talk) 13:01, 16 August 2023 (UTC)