User talk:James Lawrie

Welcome!

Hello, James Lawrie, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few links to pages you might find helpful:

You may also want to complete the Wikipedia Adventure, an interactive tour that will help you learn the basics of editing Wikipedia. You can visit the Teahouse to ask questions or seek help.

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing 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 for help on your talk page, and a volunteer should respond shortly. Again, welcome!--Biografer (talk) 21:17, 7 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Hello, James Lawrie. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest (COI). Editors with a COI 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 (see the {{request edit}} template);
disclose your COI when discussing affected articles (see WP:DISCLOSE);
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 must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation with respect to any contribution for which you receive, or expect to receive, compensation (see WP:PAID).

Also please note that editing for the purpose of advertising, publicising, or promoting anyone or anything is not permitted. Thank you.

Hi! The problem we have with NK Forster Guitars is that, under Wikipedia's Terms of Use, people paid to edit articles need to disclose their relationship with their client to help manage potential problems. This doesn't mean that you can't be paid to edit here, (although it is strongly suggested by the COI guidelines that you make suggestions rather than editing the articles directly), just that Wikipedia requires disclosure. Thus it is asked that paid editors add a note to their user page stating the employer, client and affiliation, and ideally to put a small note on the top of the article's talk page - basic instructions are at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Paid_editors. - Bilby (talk) 13:03, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Note

Messages go on users' talk pages and not user pages as you did here. Your final warning and "do not mess with me" is also uncalled for. --NeilN ^{talk to me} 13:24, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Don't mess with me?

Really?--Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:28, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I’m a very busy guy

Look everyone. I’m a very busy man. I just happen to be very passionate about British guitar companies. I actually work as a checkout clerk at my local Sainsbury’s so there is no conflict of interest going on. James Lawrie (talk) 15:32, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Warning

Stop removing the {{COI}} template from NK Forster Guitars before you're blocked. It's not "vexatious". Bishonen | talk 17:56, 11 April 2018 (UTC).[reply]

Why are you bullying me

This clearly amounts to bullying? Is it because I’m from an ethnic minority? James Lawrie (talk) 18:47, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

To be clear, you are resorting to accusations of racism when editors have no idea what ethnicity you are? --NeilN ^{talk to me} 18:51, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes

So do I need to provide a citation to prove my ethnicity now? James Lawrie (talk) 19:30, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That was either obtuse or obnoxious or just plain trolling. Not dignifying it with a further response. As we neither not nor care about your ethnicity, your cry of racism is utter bullshit.--Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:38, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

PS Keep it up and someone will remove your talk page access. At this point the only purpose in allowing you talk page access is to allow you to appeal your block. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 21:41, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for plainly not being a good fit for a collaborative project.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. NeilN ^{talk to me} 20:27, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Please unblock me.

Dear Wikipedia users this block is no longer necessary because I understand what I have been blocked for, I will not do it again, and in the future I will make productive contributions instead. Yours Faithfully, James Lawrie. James Lawrie (talk) 21:03, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry

This is one of those occasions when words fail to express the sheer remorse that I feel. I am reproached by the utter ruthlessness of my behavior and my utter contempt for the institutions that govern teleological discourse. My sincerest apologies to you all.

I promise not to do it again

If unblocked I promise I will not remove anymore of your notices of tease you by leaving messages in your text. That was very rude of me and with god as my witness I promise not to do it again.

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).

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

Request reason:

Dear Wikipedia users this block is no longer necessary because I understand what I have been blocked for, I will not do it again, and in the future I will make productive contributions instead. Yours Faithfully, James Lawrie. James Lawrie (talk) 21:10, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 21:17, 11 April 2018 (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.

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

James Lawrie (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21185 was submitted on Apr 11, 2018 22:11:09. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 22:11, 11 April 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

Look everyone. I am sorry for deleting things I realise now that this was a violation of wikipedia's spirit of knowledge. I realise that if everyone acted the way I acted wikipedia would be a very different place to the one it is now. I promise that if you unblock me I will make positive contributions to wikipedia." James Lawrie (talk) 21:36, 11 April 2018 (UTC) 331dot (talk) 22:41, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Thank you for apologizing, but we need to know what sorts of positive contributions you will make in order to determine if unblocking you is a benefit to this project. It is not enough to just say you will make positive contributions, without knowing what they are. As such, I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 22:41, 11 April 2018 (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.

unblock discussion

It would be best if you dealt with the concerns that actually led to your blocking. For instance, your incivility as evidenced in this edit with the edit summary "(DO NOT MESS WITH ME BILBY)". Care to explain what led to that? In what way was it wrong? What would you do instead? Do you remember this edit? "Why are you bullying me"? Care to explain it? How was it inappropriate? The same for this edit-- even further over the top.

We never really delved into concerns about WP:PAID. Please read and heed that. Have you edited using any other user name? Have you coordinated editing with anyone off-wiki? It would be best if you come forward now with any required disclosures.

Then there is this edit "(I have never met NK Forster and therefore I find this conflict of interest notice inaccurate, vexatious and libelous. DO NOT POST AGAIN) " Firstly, you need not have met them to have a conflict of interest. Secondly, I take that as a legal threat. Please read WP:NLT. YOU WILL NOT BE UNBLOCKED UNTIL YOU AFFIRM THAT YOU WITHDRAW SAID LEGAL THREAT OR AFFIRM YOU HAVE NO INTENTIONS OF PRESSING LEGAL ACTION. That aside, you were Edit warring by repeatedly removing that tag. Please review WP:BRD. What is the correct conduct when one has an editing dispute with another user? How would you handle things differently?

Now as to what areas in which you say you now wish to edit. You need to affirm that you understand that we do not rely on personal knowledge and expertise. Information must be cited to wp:reliable sources independent of the subject and with a reputation for fact checking.

Hope this helps. --Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:27, 12 April 2018 (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).

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

Request reason:

If unblocked I promise to use my specialist knowledge in areas such as mountain-biking, art, creative-writing, literature and music to make Wikipedia a better. Please unblock me. James Lawrie (talk) 23:00, 11 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Sorry, but this is not adequate. Dlohcierekim has provided some good advice, above, on how you should formulate an unblock appeal; please read through that and address the issues he raises in any future requests. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:37, 12 April 2018 (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.