User talk:Jfrankparnell

Hello, Jfrankparnell and a belated welcome to Wikipedia! I see that you've already been around awhile and wanted to thank you for your contributions. Though you seem to have been successful in finding your way around, you may benefit from following some of the links below, which help one get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking

or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are interested in learning more about contributing, you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! Red Director (talk) 18:33, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Getting Started
Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image
Getting Help
Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention
Policies and Guidelines
Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Simplified Manual of Style • Three-revert rule Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism • Sock puppetry Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability

The Community
Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists
Things to do
Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism
Miscellaneous
Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Note

This message contains important information about an administrative situation on Wikipedia. It does not imply any misconduct regarding your own contributions to date.

Please carefully read this information:

The Arbitration Committee has authorised discretionary sanctions to be used for pages regarding all edits about, and all pages related to post-1932 politics of the United States and closely related people, a topic which you have edited. The Committee's decision is here.

Discretionary sanctions is a system of conduct regulation designed to minimize disruption to controversial topics. This means uninvolved administrators can impose sanctions for edits relating to the topic that do not adhere to the purpose of Wikipedia, our standards of behavior, or relevant policies. Administrators may impose sanctions such as editing restrictions, bans, or blocks. This message is to notify you that sanctions are authorised for the topic you are editing. Before continuing to edit this topic, please familiarise yourself with the discretionary sanctions system. Don't hesitate to contact me or another editor if you have any questions.

--NeilN ^{talk to me} 19:23, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear to be constructive and has been reverted. If you only meant to make a test edit, please use the sandbox for that. Thank you. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:17, 16 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Travis Allen article

 Hello, I'm Bobvillage. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they did not appear constructive. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. If you have any questions, you can ask for assistance at the Help Desk. Thanks. -Bobvillage (talk) 15:44, 18 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Your recent editing history at Travis Allen shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See BRD for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in your being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you don't violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
You were actively engaged in anedit war. Please use the Talk page for article in the future. Thanks!

February 2022

Hello, Jfrankparnell. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Scott Baugh, 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, colleagues, 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 Wikipedia:Spam#External link spamming);
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. KidAd • SPEAK 22:27, 21 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for not replying sooner. I do not have a conflict of interest here. I have been writing about Orange County politics for many years, and have extensive first-hand, institutional knowledge about Orange County politics. The section in this article regarding the 1995 recall of Assemblywoman Doris Allen was very superficial and contained inaccuracies. The section on the prosecution of Assemblyman Scott Baugh was rife with factual errors and extraneous information, and lacked context. The edits and additions I made are absolutely factual and substantiated with citations.

Thank you for reaching out and I apologize again for not seeing you message and replying sooner. Jfrankparnell (talk) 01:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

March 2022

Your account has been blocked indefinitely for advertising or promotion and violating the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use. This is because you have been making promotional edits to topics in which you have a financial stake, yet you have failed to adhere to the mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a form of conflict of interest (COI) editing which involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is strictly prohibited. Using this site for advertising or promotion is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia.

If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, please read our guide to appealing blocks to understand more about unblock requests, and then add the text {{unblock|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} at the end of your user talk page. For that request to be considered, you must:

Confirm that you have read and understand the Terms of Use and paid editing disclosure requirements.
State clearly how you are being compensated for your edits, and describe any affiliation or conflict of interest you might have with the subjects you have written about.
Describe how you intend to edit such topics in the future.

Drmies (talk) 00:11, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You were asked last month to disclose whatever conflict of interest you have; you did not address the matter but instead continued making edits that smack of COI editing. I have no choice but to block you. As soon as you actually read the relevant policies and guidelines, address the matter, and disclose your COI, you will remain blocked. Drmies (talk) 00:12, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My apologies. I did not see the request for a disclosure of a conflict of interest, or I would have responded. For the record, I do not have a conflict of interest. I am not paid or employed by any campaign or candidate.

The edits I made are completely and totally factual. They are amply cited from both contemporary media accounts and legal documents.

I respect that you seek to protect Wikipedia's integrity. And with respect, challenges to an edit or addition should be based on whether or not they are factual. Jfrankparnell (talk) 00:59, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without good reason (see the blocking policy).

Jfrankparnell (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My edits and additions to the Scott Baugh page were factual, accurate and substantiated. They corrected factual errors and inaccuracies, and added context. They were accompanied by citations. I do not have a conflict of interest. I am not paid by or employed by any candidate or campaign or committee. I have been writing about and reporting on Orange County politics since the early 1990s. I have first hand, institutional about Orange County politics and governance going back three decades, and my interest in it historical accuracy. Jfrankparnell (talk) 01:33, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

It's possible to me that you are not associated with any particular campaign or candidate or committee, but when I read your edits it is not hard for me to guess where your political sympathies lie, and it should be. Your particular affiliation or beliefs are not relevant to me, but your edits need to have a neutral point of view. "Factual" is not the only thing we are looking for. I am declining your request, you may make another for someone else to review. 331dot (talk) 08:53, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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.