User talk:LiptonInstituteofTea

Unblock request

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm surprised at what happened on June 25th. See teh converstaions about user name an COI I had before. Everything seemed to eb fine and now suddenly on teh same day i get a warning AND a block? what gives?

Decline reason:

{{subst:As Mangojuice has explained below, this username is a violation of our Wikipedia:Username policy because it is a company name and also appears to be used by more than one individual. If you have read and understood the username, conflict of interest and adspam policies and still want to contribute to Wikipedia, you can request a temporary unblock to request a username change.}} Exploding Boy (talk) 16:14, 2 July 2009 (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.

Basically, institutional names like this are not allowed and despite your explanation it's still not okay. I'm sorry this wasn't dealt with previously. You seem to be editing appropriately cautiously and trying to obey our policies. The only issue is the username. Your username needs to be changed to a personal username. There are two main reasons for this: first, when people see a group name used as a username, especially for a user who writes in the 1st person plural as you did on your user page, we think the account belongs to more than one person, and that isn't allowed; see meta:Role account. Second, a username like this implies that you are somehow officially representing the Lipton Institute of Tea, which is something we can't be sure is true and do not have a good way to verify. So all that has to happen here is for you to pick a new, personal username. As for clarity of your conflict, making a note on your userpage would be sufficient. Mango juice^talk 13:32, 2 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is our talk page. We welcome any comments. Thanks! LiptonInstituteofTea (talk) 10:05, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

April 2009

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, your addition of one or more external links to the page Tea blending and additives has been reverted.
Your edit here was reverted by an automated bot that attempts to remove unwanted links and spam from Wikipedia. The external link you added or changed is on my list of links to remove and probably shouldn't be included in Wikipedia. The external links I reverted were matching the following regex rule(s): \byoutube\.com (links: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cezyhsqzw0w, http://www.youtube.com/index?ytsession=-2Oles4_eGP2hacjWFUHJ6r4f2SW9QebUeG20JSaaYqs1wjaxZ2ISjIK2Z82h5M41wak_d1c0GHFtrIufMW774LE0344BKFj3tSGJtbwuhOQNsgLWn_nUceSEvqaQR7x53aaYW5KnzPWovOg0S8gT8tu3A8_ZuqXdgoziTmrOEVFCs1fF5keAd1_psHymApyq3Utk_Zx2LAF60UHoB4fXy_7vqKDYt5pKBMNge8DMTRRA-tce1wwC0nZB2CAD0pOrCVq4CaakintSI5clXWJUNumLUeqCY4ze8M-DTaQ4_m3TM_DbSKGOJ9JM63TEl2PhIpCrbJU_KI9k8UZI-60NptrrheEL4PDBZDRfxLYIKtPVY9ufkKG-_Coxa7TARMHGiwFXTOGyS0cCkEro2rrvgwIRiP0xqWOHDikOCgyWBZA53l9jKbqUtA87by5C_Lm (redirect from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cezyhsqzw0w)). If the external link you inserted or changed was to a media file (e.g. a sound or video file) on an external server, then note that linking to such files may be subject to Wikipedia's copyright policy and therefore probably should not be linked to. Please consider using our upload facility to upload a suitable media file. Video links are also strongly deprecated by our guidelines for external links, partly because they're useless to people with slow internet connections.
If you were trying to insert an external link that does comply with our policies and guidelines, then please accept my creator's apologies and feel free to undo the bot's revert. However, if the link does not comply with our policies and guidelines, but your edit included other changes to the article, feel free to make those changes again without re-adding the link. Please read Wikipedia's external links guideline for more information, and consult my list of frequently-reverted sites. For more information about me, see my FAQ page. Thanks! --XLinkBot (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Username policy

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia!

I hope not to seem unfriendly or make you feel unwelcome, but I noticed your username, and I am concerned that it might not meet Wikipedia's username policy. After you look over that policy, could we discuss that concern here?

I'd appreciate learning your own views, for instance your reasons for wanting this particular name, and what alternative username you might accept that avoids raising this concern.

You have several options freely available to you:

If you can relieve my concern through discussing it here, I can stop worrying about it.
If the two of us can't agree here, we can ask for help through Wikipedia's dispute resolution process, such as requesting comments from other Wikipedians. Wikipedia administrators usually abide by agreements reached through this process.
You can keep your contributions history under a new username. Visit Wikipedia:Changing username and follow the guidelines there.

Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 19:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

> Thanks for the feedback. I have read the policies, and wanted to provide you with an answer. We chose this name in the interest of transparency- to avoid any issues of conflict of interest that may arrive. It is not our intention to use Wikipedia for advertising- but as a tea research institute (even if owned by a multinational company) we would like to be able to contribute to the public knowledge about tea. We probably have more people working on tea research than anybody else in the world, and we simply want to share findings and learnings where relevant and possible. Of course we want to stay strictly within the guidelines provided by Wikipedia.

We could make our contributions under a different name- but felt this was the most appropriate in order to maintain transparency. We thought it was the easiest way to guard against (accusations of) bias. Also, this account may be used by several people- as we have different specialists working on varous tea research topics.

I hope this clarifies things, and that this addresses your concerns. LiptonInstituteofTea (talk) 11:44, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

> addendum- just read the FAQs that sharing an account is nor permitted- so far, this account has not been shared. IN line with the policy, i will not share the account and will only use it myself. LiptonInstituteofTea (talk) 11:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. --Ronz (talk) 16:52, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest policy

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, 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:

editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors;
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam); and,
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. --Ronz (talk) 19:36, 28 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for this feedback. It was exactly with COI in mind that we decided to use this handle and to set up a user and talk page with full disclosure. Also, for this reason i have added only refernces research we've been involved in that was executed by independent 3rd party academic institutions and that was quoted by reliable, independent sources. I understand that it is not permissible to link or refer to our own website and will not do so. I also understand that i should not make any edits to the wikipedia article about the Lipton Institute of Tea, Lipton, Unilever, or any of its brands. I hope that would address the concern.

I did insert a link to a video to the wikipedia article on tea blending, but to avoid COI i uploaded the video to youtube, rather than linking to our own website. There was no branding added to the video so i was hoping to be sufficiently neutral to be allowed. Since it has been removed by an editor, i understand this is not the case and i will not add material produced by me or my colleagues again.

I hope you agree with me that it is permissible for me to edit general articles related to tea- an area i know a lot about and to which i feel i could add my knowledge to improve some existing wikipedia articles.

thanks! LiptonInstituteofTea (talk) 11:59, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds like you've read COI carefully and have a good plan on how you can contribute to Wikipedia. Good luck and welcome! --Ronz (talk) 16:58, 29 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

User:LiptonInstituteofTea

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:LiptonInstituteofTea, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be blatant advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person, and which is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages: user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources. Please read the general criteria for speedy deletion, particularly item 11, as well as the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for businesses.

If you can indicate why the page is not blatant advertising, you may contest the tagging. To do this, please add {{hangon}} on the top of the page in question and leave a note on this page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Feel free to leave a note on my talk page if you have any questions about this. Calton | Talk 04:35, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This account, LiptonInstituteofTea, has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia, because your username does not meet our username policy.

This is often not a reflection on the user, and you are encouraged to choose a new account name which does meet our guidelines and are invited to contribute to Wikipedia under an appropriate username. If you feel this block was made in error, you may quickly and easily appeal it—see below.

Our username policy provides guidance on selecting your username. In brief, usernames should not be offensive, disruptive, promotional, misleading, or related to a 'real-world' group or organization. Also, usernames may not end with the string "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

If you have already made edits and wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name you may request a change in username. To do so, please follow these directions:

Add {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. This is possible because even when you are blocked, you can usually still edit your own talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note, you may only request a name that is not already in use. The account is created upon acceptance – do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change since we can far more easily allocate your new name to you, if it is not yet used. Usernames that have already been taken are listed here. For more information, please visit Wikipedia:Changing username.
Alternatively, you can "abandon" the contributions under this username and create a new account, which is much faster and easier, especially if you have few or no edits.

Last, the automated software systems that prevent vandalism may have been activated, which can cause new account creation to be blocked also. If you have not acted in a deliberately inappropriate manner, please let us know if this happens, and we will deactivate the block as soon as possible. You may also appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} on your user talk page or emailing the administrator who blocked you. - Dank (push to talk) 04:40, 25 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]