User talk:EATech
Managing a conflict of interest
[edit]
Hello, EATech. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page American Defense Systems, 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, 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 Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#How to disclose a COI);
- 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 Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure.
Also, editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you. Mr Xaero ☎️ 00:44, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Thanks. Please just remove whatever items you think are spam or offensive. We have no conflict of interests and we are not trying to advertise. We were just trying to correct bad information being publicized. That’s all. i don’t see how your foundation can prefer to publish inaccurate info rather than just asking us to remove the link to our websites. Even when so many other stickers have links to website so. Neither have we made any marketing or advertising language in orb corrections. Bottom line is it doesn’t make sense for you to be publishing worng information and remove the correct information we provided.
Blocking us was also extreme and makes me wonder who is paying you to do that. Cause a simple email or message asking us to remove the offensive link would have been enough. But blocking now is AND republishing inaccurate information about our company is very suspicious.
Kindly address before real damage is done. Thanks.
October 2019
[edit]
If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy. Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In that reason, you must:
- 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.
- Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
{{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. Bishonen | talk 09:11, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
EATech (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
EATech was blocked due to “spam” and suggestions of “conflict of interest”. We believe this block was in error because: (1) we did not post any advertisements or make any links to advertisements; (2) the only reason we included our contact information in the reference section was to provide readers with a primary source of updated information. If that was against the rules, we will remove and repeat; (3) the only reason we produced the website address, was as a link to products and services offered, the same way Northrop Grumman has similar links to their products and services. We are in the same industry as NG, and thought this was standard. But we will remove such link and not repeat; (4) their is not conflict of interest because we are not the owners of the company and we are not the officers of the company, we are public shareholders like a million other people. And the same way we feel their is nothing wrong with us correcting outdated info on Microsoft or Tesla pages, is the same way we edit here. We did not state any opinions. We only have factual corrections. If these corrections are challenged based on factuality, then we apologize and will correct ourselves. But there has been no edit that is not factual. (5) This appeal against the block is most important because our intention was to only update the grossly inaccurate information regarding a historical company. We and the SEC have an interest in the information being accurate. All the details we edited are drawn from public documents registered with the SEC.gov. If you are unwilling to take the edits from us because we are shareholders, then kindly make the edits yourself. But their is a public interest in ensuring the article is properly updated and corrected immediately.
Decline reason:
You have not proposed a new username as the block notice instructs. In addition, each account may only be used by a single individual; you will need to select a single individual to exclusively operate this account. In examining your edits, there were promotional as Wikipedia defines it. Wikipedia is not interested in what an article subject wants to say about itself. SEC filings are not independent reliable sources, which is what Wikipedia is interested in. If there is incorrect information in the article about your company, we want to know what it is, but you should not edit the article yourself but you may make edit requests. You do have a conflict of interest as a shareholder or group of shareholders, as you do well when the company does well even if you are not here at the direction of the company. You're not going to be unblocked to just edit about the company; if you want to be an individual, general Wikipedia contributor, please tell what you will contribute about. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 19:54, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.
What?
[edit]You’ve made a big mistake by undoing all the corrections we have made to the article inn american defense systems. This is a publicly traded company and the information we corrected was for the public benefit. If there was any spam or links you didn’t approve of, you should have simply deleted those specific edits. But to repost outdated and incorrect information about the ownership, purpose, management and current status of the company is both illegal and unwise. You cannot be publishing and reposting inaccurate information about a publicly traded company on Wikipedia or any public media. It’s a crime. Please restore our corrections to your false information, and remove whatever items (like spam or website links) that you feel are inappropriate.
If you want; you can also unblock us, so we can continue to build the article properly. Or, if you like, keep us blocked and enjoy your day. EATech (talk) 20:20, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has no interest in any public benefit for your fellow shareholders or company customers. Wikipedia is here solely to summarize what independent sources state. I would also suggest that you review No legal threats. I've already explained how incorrect information can be corrected, but you need to want to be a general contributor here, and you need to have independent sources, which SEC filings are not. 331dot (talk) 20:35, 11 October 2019 (UTC)
Unblock Request
[edit]EATech (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
(1) First, I have taken the time to read through the blocking policies, and I can see where my edits may have breached the rules. I was editing the article from a perspective of the company or shareholders at times, and this is not permitted. All edits and contributions must be made from an neutral individual perspective. This makes sense. (2) I am not interested in using Wikipedia to promote the shareholders or company agenda. The company pays PR agents a ton of money to do that stuff. I am not an employee of the company or a paid consultant of the company. So I have no reason or interest in using my editorial access for such purposes; and I promise to do my best not to breach those rules again. (3) One of the ways I will improve the quality of my edits and contributions is to study the rules and regulations again, more carefully; and ensure that I use at least two independent sources of references for fact-checking. AND I will avoid references to documents that I may have produced personally or in any official capacity. (4) I do not believe I made any legal or casual threat, but I did make demands before that my edits should be restored to l’avoir further damage”. If a threat was implied, i apologize. I was referring to members of the public reading that article and then contacting the wrong people for information; which has not been proven to be the case yet. So, I am not aware of any damage that has been done so far. And I am not interested in pursuing any remedy for any damages. (5) If unblocked, I would, first of all, really just want to correct the wrong information in the article, and be a general contributor to articles regarding the security and defense industries. I have over 29 years of experience in law enforcement, global peacekeeping, security, and defense; and my time with the United Nations, police force, US Army, and private industries has given me knowledge of how to link primary references to current events. I think I can continue to be an asset to the foundation in that respect. (6) Aside from the corrections to the article about Americans Defense Systems; I will avoid editing or creating articles about myself, my family, my friends, my company, my organization or my competitors. If needed, I will just propose changes on the talk pages of affected articles using the {{request edit}} template; and I will always disclose my conflict of interest when discussing affected articles. And certainly, I will avoid linking to my organization's website in other articles. (7) If my username is also still offensive, please permit me to change it to “Nihimiya2019”. But I prefer to keep the name “EATech” cause that’s the username I use elsewhere. Thanks for your consideration.
Decline reason:
Your unblock request is declined due to legal threats (see WP:THREAT). Identifying a specific edit as "illegal and unwise" and "a crime" [1] are — by themselves — probably in a grey area. However, when combined with the phrases "you’ve made a big mistake" and "I have over 29 years of experience in law enforcement" [2] create a nexus that strongly implies persons who make edits to which you object may be subject to criminal penalties or prosecution. The explanation given in the unblock request is insufficient given the heavy caveats attached (e.g. "so far") which imply that editors may be jailed for their contributions to WP in the future and the fact that the original threat was completely unambiguous and not simply an expression of concern that someone may contact "the wrong people for information" as claimed. To satisfy the issue of THREAT (separate from any other blocking reasons), an unblock request should provide a reasonably believable clarification of intent that demonstrates the innocence of the original comment.
While I am unable to unblock your account, you are free to continue participation in the Wikipedia project as a non-editing reader of WP content. Thank you for your interest in Wikipedia. Chetsford (talk) 05:36, 13 October 2019 (UTC); edited 09:01, 13 October 2019 (UTC)
If you want to make any further unblock requests, please read the guide to appealing blocks first, then use the {{unblock}} template again. If you make too many unconvincing or disruptive unblock requests, you may be prevented from editing this page until your block has expired. Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.