User talk:KAC57

Welcome![edit]

Hello, KAC57, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages you might find helpful:

Introduction
The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page
How to write a great article
Simplified Manual of Style
Your first article
Discover what's going on in the Wikimedia community
Feel free to make test edits in the sandbox
and check out the Task Center, for ideas about what to work on.

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, please see our help pages, and if you can't find what you are looking for there, please feel free to ask me on my talk page or place {{Help me}} on this page and someone will drop by to help. Again, welcome! Randykitty (talk) 16:40, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your note. I am just trying to get the entry on Sociological Forum correct. I hope you will not delete the latest changes. Someone else was also trying to make changes and all changes were deleted. I have made the most minor of corrections. We have to get the publisher right. Thanks! KAC57 (talk) 16:43, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Managing a conflict of interest[edit]

Hello, KAC57. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about on the page Sociological Forum, 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. Randykitty (talk) 17:41, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no conflict of interest. The prior contributor--the one whose work you are blocking or deleting -- is not affiliated with the journal. Someone who answered my emails yesterday invited ME to correct the errors in the Sociological Forum entry knowing full well I am the editor. They thought you would honor my changes since you refused to honor the other person's changes. They specifically told me that, as editor correcting an error, there was NOT a conflict of interest. I, the publisher and the Eastern Sociological Society cannot understand why you will not let us correct the error in our journal description. Wiley publishes this journal. Wiley-Blackwell does not publish anymore. The Blackwell family has not be affiliated with Wiley since the 2010's and is no longer publishing. Check the journal website. There is no mention of Blackwell: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/15737861 Please, please allow us to correct this error. 2601:8C:4001:3A00:14DE:C6CB:B7D9:477 (talk) 22:24, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no conflict of interest. The prior contributor--the one whose work you are blocking or deleting -- is not affiliated with the journal. Someone who answered my emails yesterday invited ME to correct the errors in the Sociological Forum entry knowing full well I am the editor. They thought you would honor my changes since you refused to honor the other person's changes. They specifically told me that, as editor correcting an error, there was NOT a conflict of interest. I, the publisher and the Eastern Sociological Society cannot understand why you will not let us correct the error in our journal description. Wiley publishes this journal. Wiley-Blackwell does not publish anymore. The Blackwell family has not be affiliated with Wiley since the 2010's and is no longer publishing. Check the journal website. There is no mention of Blackwell: https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/journal/15737861 Please, please allow us to correct this error. KAC57 (talk) 22:27, 19 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked as a sockpuppet[edit]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Xuguo163 per the evidence presented at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Xuguo163. Note that multiple accounts are allowed, but not for illegitimate reasons, and any contributions made while evading blocks or bans may be reverted or deleted.

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 ~~~~}}. -- RoySmith (talk) 01:23, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

KAC57 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

My name is Karen A. Cerulo. I am a professor at Rutgers University and the editor of a journal called Sociological Forum. I have just received a message from someone identified as RoySmith saying that I, under my Wikipedia account name KAC57, have been indefinitely blocked from editing for abusing multiple accounts as a sockpuppet of User:Xuguo163. I am confused and dismayed by this message. Xuguo163 is an account associated with a graduate student at Rutgers named Xu Guo. We are not the same person. Xu approached me a while back and asked if she could update and correct the Wikipedia entry for Sociological Forum as she takes an interest in the journal. She cleared the information she planned to enter with me and made a revision. Every time Xu made an addition or correction to the Wikipedia entry for the journal, it was blocked by RandyKitty. She was first told that she entered copyrighted information. She did not, but nevertheless removed the information in question. She asked to enter the journal’s five year impact factor as, for sociology journals, it is the more commonly used metric; she was denied. She asked to correct the name of our publisher; she was denied. Time after time, Xu responded to the objections of RandyKitty, but each time, her revised entry was blocked by RandyKitty and Xu herself was blocked from editing for 36 hours. When I saw what was happening, I wrote to Wikipedia. I had an extended correspondence with Geofrey Lane trying to explain that, if nothing else, the publisher of Sociological Forum had to be corrected. Wiley-Blackwell is not the publisher of the journal. The Blackwell family sold their interests in publishing to John Wiley and Sons. For a brief period, the Wiley-Blackwell name was used for publishing. But since the 2010s, our journal (and many others) are published by Wiley. At Geofrey Lane’s suggestion, I established my own Wikipedia account (KAC57) on April 18th, I believe. Geofrey wrote that even though I was the editor of Sociological Forum, I could correct an error and not be considered as having a conflict of interest. I did so and RandyKitty blocked my attempts as he had done for Xu. Now, I have been informed I am blocked indefinitely from editing on Wikipedia. I am not technologically inclined and have never edited on Wikipedia before. I have no idea what a sockpuppet is. But I ask that you a) be aware that Xu Guo (Xuguo163) and Karen A. Cerulo (KAC57) are two different people, b) that you allow one of us (preferably Xu) to correct the publisher of Sociological Forum, and c) that you unblock me since I did nothing wrong. Please let me know what you decide. Karen Cerulo cerulo@sociology.rutgers.edu or ckru57@gmail.com — Preceding undated comment added 02:39, 20 April 2022‎ (UTC)

Accept reason:

There's a few distinct issues here. My involvement was to examine some confidential log data and determine if the two accounts were being operated by the same person, which would be a violation of our use policies. Based on the technical data that was available to me, it certainly looked like the two accounts were the same person. I normally wouldn't disclose anything about the data in public, but since you've already done so yourself, I'll confirm that yes, I could see that the edits were coming from an address registered to Rutgers. Anyway, I'm going to unblock both accounts, but please read WP:COI and make the appropriate declaration on the user page for your account and have your student do the same. If you have any questions about that, I'll be happy to answer them, or you can ask at WP:TEA for advice.

All that being said, I need to emphasize that my unblocking the accounts is not carte blanche to make any specific changes. We still have policies about all information being verifiable, and as you've seen, we're very strict about copyright issues. Distinct from that, I'll quote from WP:COI where it says COI editors are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly, and can propose changes on article talk pages instead If you have corrections to make, that's what you should do. Regarding Randykitty, despite the picture of a ferocious cat on their user page, they're a very experienced and helpful admin who I'm sure will also be willing to answer questions about what edits are appropriate and which are not. Or, again, asking at WP:TEA is a good way to move forward; the people who answer question there are dedicated to helping new editors navigate our complex rules and policies. -- RoySmith (talk) 22:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First, Thanks for unblocking me.

I do have some questions.

1) Xu has no conflict of interest. She is not affiliated with the journal. Apparently I do. What declaration am I supposed to make and where? The link you sent says "on my page." I do not know what that means. I am not a regular Wikipedia contributor and find this all very confusing.

2) How can we correct the name of the publisher? Both Xu and I have tried several times and have been rejected. Frankly, I am afraid to try anything on Wikipedia again because of what happened here. Wiley-Blackwell, in reality, does not exist. Blackwell was a family owned business that sold out to Wiley in the 2010s. Wiley maintained the Blackwell name in some areas, but as our journal page shows, we are published by Wiley--that's it. I would like to correct that. Every time Xu or I tried to correct it, we were rejected. I feel badly that the Sociological Forum page has erroneous information--especially under my watch. Can you guide me?

Thanks again,

Karen KAC57 (talk) 22:53, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You should edit User:KAC57. There's some fancy templates you can use, but if you just say, "I am the editor of a journal called Sociological Forum", that satisfies the requirement.

The suggested way for people with a COI to suggest changes to articles they are associated with is to suggest the changes on the article's talk page. In this case, that would be Talk:Sociological Forum. Again, the exact format of the request isn't the critical thing. Just say what change you'd like to see made, and provide a good source to verify it. So, "Can somebody please change the publisher to be XXX. The source can be <some URL>". If the change is reasonable and the source is reliable, I'd expect that somebody will pick it up and perform the edit for you. I know this sounds awkward, but it's designed to resolve the conflict-of-interest problems. -- RoySmith (talk) 23:29, 20 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

When I click on User:KAC57, it says the page was removed (by you) and I see no place to add my affiliation with Sociological Forum. Can you help? KAC57 (talk) 00:14, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As part of the blocking process, I had created a version of your user page which said you were a sockpuppet. I removed that when I unblocked you, which is why you got that message. But it looks like you got it all sorted out now. -- RoySmith (talk) 00:35, 21 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]