User talk:WKCole

conflict of interest
If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:
 * 1) editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
 * 2) participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
 * 3) linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Spam);
 * and you must always:
 * 1) avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Conflict of Interest.

OK, the above is the standard warning and I personally don't think your edit was inappropriate, I can see how others would. It is probably best to let others cite your website.

On the subject of DNSBLs and such, I recently went looking to find a reliable source (WP:RS) to where MAPS asserted trademark status on the term "RBL" and/or asked others to not use it. All I could easily find were your website and several postings by you on various mailing lists/newsgroups. If you have reference, could you mention them on Talk:DNSBL and/or add a reference to the article? Thanks. Wrs1864 (talk) 20:48, 26 May 2008 (UTC)


 * In regards to the link to my DNSBL document, I would certainly not have added the first reference to it, but since someone else had already put a reference to the (huge) page as a whole I figured a specific internal link on a particular issue made sense.
 * As for the trademark, it is reg. #2775425 and I'm trying to figure out a way to reference that properly.

WKCole (talk) 19:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)