User talk:Rebjon

January 2015
Hello, I'm Elizium23. I noticed that you recently removed some content from Rebecca De Mornay without explaining why. In the future, it would be helpful to others if you described your changes to Wikipedia with an accurate edit summary. If this was a mistake, don't worry; I restored the removed content. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 23:31, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest
Hello, Rebjon. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Rebecca De Mornay, 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. Elizium23 (talk) 23:32, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Rebecca Demornay
If you are, as you claim, Rebecca Demornay then you need to do a few things here on Wikipedia. Firstly, you can prove your identity by contacting the Volunteer Response Team. None of us editors can know for certain if you are who you claim to be. With OTRS you will be able to securely prove your claim to the satisfaction of Wikipedia. Secondly, please read the above notice I gave you regarding conflicts of interest. You are strongly discouraged from editing your own article. It is suggested instead that you post to the talk page and suggest a course of action, if there are things which you think should be changed in your article. Note that Wikipedia has strict policies regarding biographies of living people and it is mainly by these policies which we use to determine what goes into an article and what stays out. I hope this helps some, and that your stay here on Wikipedia is a fruitful one. Elizium23 (talk) 05:10, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Blocked
You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding the following text below this notice:. However, you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I've blocked you as a suspected sock of User:Drjdemornay. If you are the actress herself, then you need to contact the volunteer response team and prove your identity. The issue though, is that you would still have to provide reliable sources to back up the claims in the article. A say-so just isn't enough for Wikipedia and if you are the actress, then you can understand the reasons behind this. A lot of people can claim something, but we need it to be verified before it can or should be put in the article. Just because something has been in the article for any period of time does not mean that it should be in there- in many cases it just means that it hasn't been found and removed yet. Now if you are the actress, then a good way to get around this would be to mention some of this in an interview in a reliable source like a newspaper (New York Times, LA Times), a reliable website or magazine (Variety, CinemaBlend), or another source that would pass muster at the reliable sources noticeboard. Now given that your brother (again, assuming you are who you say you are) has created multiple accounts to try to add this to the article, his attempts to re-add the information has been seen as disruptive and it will take coverage in reliable sources to add the information. I also need to emphasize how important it is to verify (you can e-mail info-en@wikimedia.org) that you are who you say you are, since again- because your brother has created multiple accounts (which is considered WP:SOCKPUPPETRY and is against Wikipedia policy), any claims that you are the actress are viewed with a high amount of suspicion. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   05:55, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
 * I also have to mention that if you aren't the actress, then this is seen as impersonation and is not the right way of going about trying to prove your claims. Tokyogirl79 (｡◕‿◕｡)   06:05, 24 January 2015 (UTC)