User talk:Bsacgeorge

The Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use require that editors disclose their "employer, client, and affiliation" with respect to any paid contribution; see WP:PAID. For advice about reviewing paid contributions, see WP:COIRESPONSE.

Bsacgeorge (talk · contribs) has been paid by British Screen Advisory Council. http://bsac.uk.com/our-staff.html.

August 2012

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one of your recent edits has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: The British Screen Advisory Council was changed by Bsacgeorge (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.909164 on 2012-08-22T15:57:33+00:00 . Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 15:57, 22 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome!

Hello, Bsacgeorge, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was The British Screen Advisory Council, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, and then ask me or another editor to proofread it. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The plain and simple conflict of interest guide
The five pillars of Wikipedia
Contributing to Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! 220 of ^Borg 23:03, 9 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Username etc

Hi Bsacgeorge. Per your e-mail about your username etc., it seems OK to me. The applicable policy/s can be found at WP:ISU.

"... usernames are acceptable if they contain a company or group name but are clearly intended to denote an individual person, such as "Mark at WidgetsUSA", "Jack Smith at the XY Foundation", "WidgetFan87", etc.

So 'User:bsac' on its own might be dubious, but your username is saying you are 'george at The British Screen Advisory Council (BSAC)', thus so long as you are the only user of this account, it should be OK. And no one has queried it so far either. (Except for User:ClueBot NG, and that's a software 'bot'.)

If you haven't seen it yet, see Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure seems relevent, as you are an employee of BSAC. It seems it is required to put a 'disclosure' on your userpage, and it seems one on the BSAC talkpage is also required. Regards, 220 of ^Borg

Membership lists

Such lists are usually not appropriate for a Wikipedia article, as the encyclopedia is not intended to be used as a source for current membership lists, unless such lists are so significant that they're received substantial coverage from outside reliable sources. Otherwise that's a function of in-house publications. Thank you, 2601:188:1:AEA0:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 11:40, 13 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]