User talk:ShadowOwlScribe

January 2024
 Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because your account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, your username gives the impression that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

If you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization, you may request unblock and a username change. In your reasons, you must: To do this, post the text  at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked.
 * Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement; and
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked; and
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked; and
 * Provide a new username.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken and in use by another account. You can go here to search and see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is available to be taken.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text  at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. Drmies (talk) 01:21, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Answers Below:
 * Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement - N/A
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked - I understand that my username could be construed as promotion so I have proposed to change it to initials. Also, although the link I provided was to a website page that presented a copy of the full source text which was being referenced, with commentary, that I believed would add value, since the previous link was a 'Dead Link', I understand that this could be construed as promotion by virtue of it being in the style of a blog rather than the raw source text itself.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked - I would like to contribute in an appropriate way to supporting the improvement of content relating to mindfulness, it's origins, history and coalescence with other disciplines and traditions, in which I hold expertise and a profound interest. Mindfulness.Camp (talk) 02:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the helpful qualification around the block.
 * I have noted you points around use of content cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject, which I certainly now understand in full and appreciate and will adhere to moving forward. With regards to Conflict of Interest I noted in the section "Making uncontroversial edits" that "Editors who have a general conflict of interest may make unambiguously uncontroversial edits (but see WP:FINANCIALCOI)" of which "repair broken links" is considered uncontroversial, so long as the there is no "FinancialCOI", which includes promotion as Drmies outlined in a comment below. The link I should have provided needed to adhere to the content citation standards you outlined above.
 * What I would do differently, is cite a reliable, independent, direct/independent secondary source such as this or this with a page reference included to the direct quotation in order to support readers quickly and reliably access the source content only. I would intend to contribute in this way to Wikipedia moving forward. Jpkmindfulness (talk) 11:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the helpful qualification around the block.
 * I have noted you points around use of content cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject, which I certainly now understand in full and appreciate and will adhere to moving forward. With regards to Conflict of Interest I noted in the section "Making uncontroversial edits" that "Editors who have a general conflict of interest may make unambiguously uncontroversial edits (but see WP:FINANCIALCOI)" of which "repair broken links" is considered uncontroversial, so long as the there is no "FinancialCOI", which includes promotion as Drmies outlined in a comment below. The link I should have provided needed to adhere to the content citation standards you outlined above.
 * What I would do differently, is cite a reliable, independent, direct/independent secondary source such as this or this with a page reference included to the direct quotation in order to support readers quickly and reliably access the source content only. I would intend to contribute in this way to Wikipedia moving forward. Jpkmindfulness (talk) 11:25, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

The link you added was this one. The "CAMP" link, top right, indicates what kind of website this is--and that, with your name, is why I blocked you. Article improvement comes with reliable, independent secondary sources, not commercial websites. Drmies (talk) 03:18, 18 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you Drmies. I have provided my assurance above. Thank you for taking the time to explain. Jpkmindfulness (talk) 11:26, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have also taken a read of some of the introductory materials which outline your points succinctly too:
 * Wikipedia:Eight simple rules for editing our encyclopedia - Wikipedia
 * I now have a much firmer grasp of the responsibility and intent when editing and would be interested in contributing fairly to the encyclopaedia. Also to your note around promotion I have read and understood this completely as outlined here. For complete assurance I would be open to changing my account name again to something completely unrelated to my field. Jpkmindfulness (talk) 11:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Changing your name would not change your conflict of interest. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 13:16, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Deepfriedokra
 * Moving forward I will not edit any content on Wikipedia relating to mindfulness as per your previous message. The username change was simply an additional assurance if required, which as you state is not. Jpkmindfulness (talk) 16:36, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What new username would you like? -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:50, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Deepfriedokra
 * ShadowScribe Jpkmindfulness (talk) 17:03, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Drat. We already have a ShadowScribe. Please try again. Thanks -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Deepfriedokra ShadowOwlScribe Jpkmindfulness (talk) 17:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * globally renamed Jpkmindfulness to ShadowOwlScribe. It is done! -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:43, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * What say ye? OK to unblock? --  Deepfriedokra (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Go for it, DFO. Drmies (talk) 17:46, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Unblocked. Welcome back -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:07, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks ShadowOwlScribe (talk) 18:13, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * My pelasurr -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 18:14, 18 January 2024 (UTC)

globally renamed Mindfulness.Camp to Jpkmindfulness
globally renamed Mindfulness.Camp to Jpkmindfulness -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 03:15, 18 January 2024 (UTC)