User talk:ShauneenBeukes

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Mean as custard (talk) 09:28, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

April 2017

Please do not add unsourced or original content, as you did with this edit to Aspen Pharmacare. Doing so violates Wikipedia's verifiability policy. If you continue to do so, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Jim1138 (talk) 09:34, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You may be blocked from editing without further warning the next time you vandalize Wikipedia, as you did with this edit to Aspen Pharmacare. Jim1138 (talk) 09:37, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may request an unblock by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.

Materialscientist (talk) 09:49, 24 April 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

Your reason here Good day - I am exceedingly apologetic for having contravened the Wikipedia editing guidelines. I'm attempting to update the Aspen Pharmacare page on behalf of my client - Aspen. I noted that some of the corporate, governance and financial information was last updated as far back as 2011 and this was not in the interests of the user or the company. I have spent some time revising the behavioural guidelines and acknowledge my edit warring faults particularly related to: * Bulleted list item deleting old comments placed by external authors which are no longer valid or are outdated - I understand now that I cannot delete comments placed by another author; * providing what I now understand to be 'promotional' material although I though that a stock exchange notification was governance related rather than promotional. In this instance perhaps the error was that I deleted the existing content and replaced it with the stock exchange information whereas I should have retained the content supplied by a former contributor and added to it. I apologise profusely. * As this was my first attempt at editing and I was so engrossed with the process I did not notice the messages that were filtering through to my Notices. Please also accept my apologies in this regard. * From analysis I 'think' that I may have contravened the three revert rule within 24 hours by making multiple edits on a single page. I was following this practice to check that the manner in which I was editing was accurate so it was a sincere innocent mistake for which I apologise. I hereby undertake to follow the Wikipedia guidelines and protocols and - when in doubt - rather request advice from an administrator on this talk page. Furthermore, I undertake to ensure that content is factual rather than promotional / opinion related and further, to regularly check my notices - possibly activate a sound setting to alert me to notices (still to investigate if there is such an option). In conclusion, I humbly request that you please unblock me and I will ensure that I keep the Aspen Pharmacare wikipedia updated with factual information to the benefit of users. I await your considerate revert of this request. Many thanks and kind regards, Shauneen Beukes, Aspen Group Corporate Communications Manager ShauneenBeukes (talk) 10:43, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

You've been engaged in whitewashing that article. As such, it's very unlikely you'll be unblocked unless you agree to refrain from editing articles directly. If you have read and understood WP:PAID, WP:COI, and WP:PROMO (all of which you have violated), you are welcome to request another unblock. You'll need to explain specifically how you will avoid any further violations. For example, it would be appropriate for you to suggest changes on the article's talk page, after disclosing your WP:PAID and WP:COI status. Yamla (talk) 10:51, 24 April 2017 (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.

--ShauneenBeukes (talk) 11:26, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Conflict of interest

Your message above indicates that you have a conflict of interest.
Hello, ShauneenBeukes. 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, and it is important when editing Wikipedia articles that such connections be completely transparent. See the conflict of interest guideline and FAQ for organizations for more information. In particular, we ask that you please:

avoid editing or creating articles related to you and your family, friends, school, company, club, or organization, as well as any competing companies' projects or products;
instead, you are encouraged to propose changes on the Talk pages of affected article(s) (see the {{request edit}} template);
when discussing affected articles, disclose your COI (see WP:DISCLOSE);
avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or to the website of your organization in other articles (see WP:SPAM);
exercise great caution so that you do not violate 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).

Please take a few moments to read and review Wikipedia's policies regarding conflicts of interest, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, sourcing and autobiographies. Thank you. Jim1138 (talk) 10:46, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Jim - thank you for your revert - much obliged. I now understand your concerns re a COI. I will most certainly not attempt to edit any articles but to disclose updates / accuracies on the talk page. Further, please can you clarify for me for absolute certainty: - am I permitted to provide updates to the likes of governance and/or audited information such as revenue as well as statutory information concerning eg the board of directors, corporate timeline, global presence etc with links to the relevant Aspen web pages as reference or is this also viewed as being biased? Pardon the questions, but I'd rather err on the side of caution. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ShauneenBeukes (talk • contribs)

Please sign your talk with four tildes: "~~~~"

If you understand the issues and will follow the COI/Paid guidelines, I would suggest making another wp:unblock request. Cheers Jim1138 (talk) 11:20, 24 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

reason Thank you Yamla and Jim for the valuable advice. I have reviewed the WP:PAID, WP:COI and WP:PROMO pages which I unknowingly and innocently violated. Again - I sincerely apologise for my actions. To this end, I commit to refrain from editing any articles directly but rather to request updates / amendments to articles on the talk page. Furthermore I will disclose my WP:PAID and WP:COI status when requesting such updates on the talk page and I will also ensure that the home page is updated to reflect the userbox=yes status. Given the above - I further undertake to review all the Wiki guidelines again before attempting to make further updates to the page. My only query that I require clarity on please is whether I am permitted to update financial, statutory, governance and corporate information and include the associated reference links to the Aspen website or whether this would also be construed as soapboxing - particularly updates to the nubmer of employees, the global presence (where offices are located), timeline, history, product etc. Please advise accordingly. I await your response at your convenience. Kind regards. --ShauneenBeukes (talk) 11:32, 24 April 2017 (UTC)

Accept reason:

After discussing with the blocking admin, I have lifted your block. It looks like you understand WP:PAID and WP:COI and you have agreed to refrain from editing articles directly and instead, to suggest changes on the article's talk page after properly disclosing your conflict of interest. As to your query, please refrain from editing even those parts directly. My concern there is that timeline, history, and product edits are often promotional in nature. You are free to ask an admin to ease that particular restriction once you have proven yourself (say, in six months). Note that your article restriction only applies to articles for which you have a conflict of interest. It applies to Aspen Pharmacare, for example, as they are your client. It applies to all other clients you have. It applies to the competitors and related businesses. But it would not apply to, say, the random article, Hippopotamus, assuming you don't have any clients related to hippos. Yamla (talk) 12:33, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Materialscientist:. I'm inclined to consider unblocking this user on the promise above, combined with not permitting the specific edits listed above in the query part (though obviously, the user would be free to suggest that on the talk page). It looks to me like they've taken the time to read up on our policies and I think this demonstrates good faith and a likelihood to not repeat the previous inappropriate edits. --Yamla (talk) 12:10, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ok. Materialscientist (talk) 12:14, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Notice

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. --Guy (Help!) 17:34, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]