User talk:Chrisfairbank888
Welcome Chrisfairbank888!
I'm Walter Görlitz, one of the other editors here, and I hope you decide to stay and help contribute to this amazing repository of knowledge.
| Some pages of helpful information to get you started: | Some common sense Dos and Don'ts:
|
| If you need further help, you can: | or you can: | or even: |
Alternatively, leave me a message at my talk page or type {{helpme}} here on your talk page and someone will try to help.
There are many ways you can contribute to Wikipedia. Here are a few ideas:
|
|
To get some practice editing you can use a sandbox. You can create your own personal sandbox for use any time. It's perfect for working on bigger projects. Then for easy access in the future, you can put {{My sandbox}} on your user page. By the way, seeing as you haven't created a user page yet, simply click here to start it.
Please remember to:
- Always sign your posts on talk pages. You can do this either by clicking on the
button on the edit toolbar or by typing four tildes ~~~~at the end of your post. This will automatically insert your signature, a link to your talk page, and a timestamp. - Leave descriptive edit summaries for your edits. Doing so helps other editors understand what changes you have made and why you made them.
Sincerely, Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:23, 7 February 2020 (UTC) (Leave me a message)
Walter Görlitz (talk) 22:23, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
Blocked for sockpuppetry[edit]
 | This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing for sock puppetry per evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Narruda. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but using them for illegitimate reasons is not, and that any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted. If you believe that this block was in error, and you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here ~~~~}} below. ST47 (talk) 02:53, 8 February 2020 (UTC) |
- In the future, please read the instructions for conflict of interest editing on user talk:Narruda and User talk:Triple 8 Intern, and please do not attempt to edit Triple 8 client articles directly. There are many editors who would be willing to assist you avoid further blocks. Walter Görlitz (talk) 03:07, 8 February 2020 (UTC)
Chrisfairbank888 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Hi Walter, there may be some confusion here as I am not the intern that was attempting to make edits to this page earlier last week (and was actually unaware that she was doing so until after I submitted mine). I am, however, an employee of Triple 8. I do not have any other accounts as you'll see that this one has been active for a number of years. I do apologize for not fully understanding the editing rules, but I've been reading through the material that you've linked me to. My hopes are that, if reinstated, we would be able to suggest edits on our artist's pages after filling out proper COI information. My only interest is to make sure that these pages are as up to date as possible. We appreciate the effort that you've put into monitoring these pages and would love to work with you to see to it that they are as accurate as possible. Looking forward to your response. Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 19:19, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Decline reason:
It doesn't matter to Wikipedia whether you are the same intern or someone else - we would never be able to prove what hand was on the keyboard. See WP:COWORKER. That said, I was quite sympathetic until I read that your "only interest is to make sure that these pages are as up to date as possible" and "as accurate as possible". No. Your primary interest is promoting your clients. That's obvious when I read phrases such as " featured over 60 shows" or "numerous festivals", let alone "inspirational message of hope". Huon (talk) 20:45, 21 February 2020 (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.
- I'm not an admin, I can't block or unblock you.
- My only purpose in writing you was to inform you that if you decide to create another account that you should not directly edit any of the articles if your clients. Instead, add concrete changes to the talk pages and let experienced editor vet those changes. Walter Görlitz (talk) 19:47, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- Is there a way to reverse the block? My understanding is that sockpuppetry is the act of creating/using multiple accounts. Wouldn't it be more honest if my suggested edits remained on the account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisfairbank888 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- The unblock is up to an admin. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- Do you know how long it typically takes for an admin to review an unblock request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisfairbank888 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
- It's usually within a day. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
- @Walter Görlitz: @Chrisfairbank888: Chrisfairbank888 and Narruda were editing from the same internet connection, but likely from separate devices. There was also Triple 8 Intern who was blocked several months ago. It's plausible that they are different people, but this intern story sounds awfully like someone's blaming their WP:LITTLEBROTHER. If an uninvolved admin wants to unblock, they are welcome to do so - after addressing the WP:COI and WP:UPE issues. It's clear that Chrisfairbank888 is a publicist and shouldn't be editing his clients' pages directly. ST47 (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
- You are correct that we're using the same IP address, but I don't work directly with the interns and wasn't aware of their activity. But you are correct - in referencing the WP:COI a "band's manager should not be editing the band's page". As stated above, we plan to work within these rules and will "requesting edits" from here on out.
- I noticed a "declined" edit made early this morning and then removed shortly soon after. Am I to assume that whoever made the "declined" determination was not authorized to do so and that this is still under review? The note included said, "go sock on other sites, not here." I will say, if I was truly attempting to sock or conceal a conflict of interest, I wouldn't have used my real name and company in my username or my work email on the account. Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 17:31, 16 February 2020 (UTC)
- You are correct that we're using the same IP address, but I don't work directly with the interns and wasn't aware of their activity. But you are correct - in referencing the WP:COI a "band's manager should not be editing the band's page". As stated above, we plan to work within these rules and will "requesting edits" from here on out.
- @Walter Görlitz: @Chrisfairbank888: Chrisfairbank888 and Narruda were editing from the same internet connection, but likely from separate devices. There was also Triple 8 Intern who was blocked several months ago. It's plausible that they are different people, but this intern story sounds awfully like someone's blaming their WP:LITTLEBROTHER. If an uninvolved admin wants to unblock, they are welcome to do so - after addressing the WP:COI and WP:UPE issues. It's clear that Chrisfairbank888 is a publicist and shouldn't be editing his clients' pages directly. ST47 (talk) 21:09, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
- It's usually within a day. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:58, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
- Do you know how long it typically takes for an admin to review an unblock request? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisfairbank888 (talk • contribs) 20:51, 12 February 2020 (UTC)
- The unblock is up to an admin. Walter Görlitz (talk) 20:07, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
- Is there a way to reverse the block? My understanding is that sockpuppetry is the act of creating/using multiple accounts. Wouldn't it be more honest if my suggested edits remained on the account? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chrisfairbank888 (talk • contribs) 20:00, 10 February 2020 (UTC)
Hi Huon - I appreciate your response and ask for additional guidance on the matter. How was including the number-range of headling shows they played on the Pep Talks Tour (which totaled 67) or using the word "numerous" (which is included 5 times on Donald Trump's wiki page) obviously promoting my client? I can understand how "inspirational message of hope" is more promotional, but it is an honest representation of the album as reported by several publications: GRAMMY News, "Judah & the Lion On Choosing Hope In Tough Times...", Cleveland Scene, "Judah & the Lion Delivers a Message of Hope at Jacobs Pavilion at Nautica", 303 Magazine "If there was any message to be taken away from the evening, it was a message of hope.", Lincoln Journal Star, "Judah & the Lion bringing musical message of hope to Bourbon Wednesday". I do apologize, however, if I overstepped when using the word "inspirational". I was wholeheartedly trying to add accurate and sourced information without bias. As it stands, the page is out-of-date missing 6 months of touring and 5 singles. If reinstated, I would love to submit edit requests as I believe that would be the most honest, non-sockpuppetry way to move forward. Perhaps I'm missing something but that is my understanding from the Conflict of Interest page. If this is not possible, what are other appropriate ways to have pages updated with information? Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 21:38, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- How is "more than 60" more accurate than "67"? Why didn't you put the number range at "fewer than 70 shows"? And what is "numerous"? Five festivals? 50? 500? Whether other articles are unnecessarily vague is irrelevant; neither "more than 60" nor "numerous" is "as accurate as possible", and of course neither was backed up by a reliable third-party source. The purpose here was to make the band's achievements sound great, not to be accurate. Huon (talk) 22:42, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK apply to the writing style. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
- It reads that the remedy for both WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK is for it to be rewritten, not deleted and permanently ban the user. I understand that that is not originally why I was banned, but I'm trying to understand how I can best contribute to the page within the rules (which Walter Görlitz has been extremely helpful in linking me to). I am not denying that I was in violation of a conflict of interest, but is there a reason this can't become a learning opportunity instead of simply a ban? Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- You are a good copywriter, but not a good lawyer. You were not blocked not for your writing but for "abusing multiple accounts". Narruda and Triple 8 Intern had lots of copyright violations and promotional language that led to those editors' blocks and then there was the anonymous editing that were problematic. In short, most editors are Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia. I, and several other editors, some of whom are admins, get the idea that you're here to make sure your clients are well-represented. That's not what the project is for. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:33, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- I understand why I was initially banned, but I was honest in my answers that I am not Narruda and Triple 8 Intern (I've only made edits from this account, which dates back to 2018). And I also respect and understand the mission of Wikipedia. As I've stated above, according to the conflict of interest page, someone can request an edit to a page they may be affiliated with. Why has this option not been entertained? Wouldn't my ability to suggest edits to the page that is lacking current information help expand the encyclopedia? I truly am trying to understand the rules and I plan to report back to the company so that everyone has a full understanding of the rules. I've been reading through the edit history on the Judah & the Lion page and really was unaware of how many edits our interns were (unsuccessfully) making, and I'd like to make sure we're getting it right. We have over 40 employees and a revolving door of interns so this can be a learning moment for quite a few folks. The more info that I have, the more I can explain to the internship coordinators as well as the managers what to do and what not to do. And if I have the ability to request an edit, we could funnel this work through me instead of tasking interns to make poor edits. Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 02:52, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- You are a good copywriter, but not a good lawyer. You were not blocked not for your writing but for "abusing multiple accounts". Narruda and Triple 8 Intern had lots of copyright violations and promotional language that led to those editors' blocks and then there was the anonymous editing that were problematic. In short, most editors are Wikipedia:Here to build an encyclopedia. I, and several other editors, some of whom are admins, get the idea that you're here to make sure your clients are well-represented. That's not what the project is for. Walter Görlitz (talk) 00:33, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- It reads that the remedy for both WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK is for it to be rewritten, not deleted and permanently ban the user. I understand that that is not originally why I was banned, but I'm trying to understand how I can best contribute to the page within the rules (which Walter Görlitz has been extremely helpful in linking me to). I am not denying that I was in violation of a conflict of interest, but is there a reason this can't become a learning opportunity instead of simply a ban? Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 00:06, 22 February 2020 (UTC)
- WP:WEASEL and WP:PEACOCK apply to the writing style. Walter Görlitz (talk) 23:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)
A note to TonyBallioni, Isabelj97 is not me. After receiving a notification last night, I sent another staff email to ask folks not to have interns make any wiki edits. I was informed that there was actually a recurring task on an intern task sheet that instructed them to "check client's pages once/month for inaccuracy", which has since been removed. That should mitigate this issue. I am still at a loss for guidance as I've asked Huon how we can best operate in this environment, but have not yet heard back. Chrisfairbank888 (talk) 16:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)