User talk:ClaytonTimcke

Hello, WebGap, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I noticed that one of the first articles you edited was Amarula, which appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been undone for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of your contributions being undone, you might like to draft your revised article before submission, which will be reviewed by other editors. See our help page on userspace drafts for more details. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

One rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which imply that the account belongs to a company or corporation. If you have a username like this, you should request a change of username or create a new account. (A name that identifies the user as an individual within a given organization may be OK.)

In addition, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for any contribution you make, you must disclose your employer, client, and affiliation to comply with our terms of use and our policy on paid editing.

Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• Best practices for editors with close associations
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Contributing to Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page and How to develop articles
• How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
• Simplified Manual of Style
• The Teahouse, our help forum for new editors

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, visit the Teahouse, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{Help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:25, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi WebGap. Your recent edits to Amarula introduced all kinds of formatting, style and other types of errors that weren't in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. You also added a number of images with questionable copyright licenses and claims of "own work" to article: the photos you uploaded appear to be professionally taken ones that are quite similar to those found on Amarula's official website. Given that your account so far has been only used for editing Wikipedia content about Amarula, it seems that you're somehow connected to company that makes Armalua. If that's the case, please carefully read through the information I've provided above and make sure your understand and comply with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines before editing the article about Armalua again. Please note that a failure to do so could lead to your account being blocked by a Wikipedia administrator, particularly if it turns out that you're not in compliance with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:38, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your message and appreciate your concerns. We are the digital agency that supports Amarula and have been given permission to update their information and images on their behalf. If you would like confirmation of such consent, please let me know and I will be happy to request from them. They supplied the images and content from them directly. I look forward to your response.

There is actually one image of the bartender that was added by someone external that they would like removed and perhaps you can assist with this? Thank you WebGap (talk) 11:07, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying things a bit. Based on what you've posted above, you and anyone else working at your agency would most certainly need to comply with Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Paid editors and Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. Please note that failing to properly declare your working for an agency that has been contracted to update the article for Amarula is going to be considered a violation of Wikipedia's terms of use and will most likely lead to your account being blocked by a Wikipedia administrator; so, I strongly suggest you read the pages I've linked to above and make the proper declaration before making any more edits to the "Amarula" article. Some other Wikipedia informational pages you probably should look at are Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:When your boss tells you to edit Wikipedia. Wikipedia article aren't owned by the subjects they're written about and neither the subject nor anyone editing on behalf of the subject has any final editorial control of what's written in the article. Wikipedia articles are only intended to reflect what reliable sources (primarily WP:SECONDARY and WP:INDEPENDENT sources) have written or said about the subject in a neutral manner; so, any attempts to try and use the article to promote Amarula or any other products associated with it, this includes images, are likely going to end up being reverted by others as not being in compliance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Moreover, if you try to hard too many times to skew the article to Amarula's preferred version, your account is likely going to end up being blocked by a Wikipedia administrator. Your best cahnce going forward here is to make all of the declarations you're required to make, and then follow the advise given in Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide and propose the changes you feel need to be made using Wikipedia:Edit requests on the article's talk page.

Finally, since you used "we" quite a bit in your post above, you might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Username policy#Shared accounts because Wikipedia policy, in principle, doesn't allow an account to be shared by multiple users. If more than one person at Amarula or your agency is going to make edit requests or otherwise propose changes to the article, they will need to create their own Wikipedia accounts. They will also be subject to all the conflict-of-interest or paid-contribution policies and guidelines mentioned above. Please keep this is mind because a Wikiepdia administrator will block your account if they have concerns that it's being used by multiple persons. If you have any questions about any of this, you can ask them below or at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:01, 4 October 2025 (UTC)

Thank you very much for this info. I will look into resolving this tomorrow (Monday). Thank you 105.225.20.188 (talk) 05:58, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

If, by chance, you're WebGap, you should try to log in to your account when posting for the reasons given in WP:LOGGEDOUT. It's not against the rules per se to edit while logged out, but doing so can be confusing and people might mistakenly assume someone other than WebGap is the person posting. In addition, it makes your IP address visible, which in some cases can be an issue as explained in WP:REALWORLD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:30, 5 October 2025 (UTC)

Hello WebGap. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Amarula, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being employed (or being compensated in any way) by a person, group, company or organization to promote their interests. Paid advocacy on Wikipedia must be disclosed even if you have not specifically been asked to edit Wikipedia. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are strongly discouraged from direct article editing and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:WebGap. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=WebGap|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:18, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

I thought, from what was posted in the discussion thread immediately above this one, you understood that your connection to Armalua required you to comply with Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. You've not yet properly done this and the longer you wait the greater the risk that your account will end up being blocked a Wikipedia administrator. You need to make sure you comply with this Wikipedia policy before making any more edits to the article or posts on its corresponding talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:22, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

You still have not adequately responded or taken action to the inquiry regarding your appearance as an undisclosed paid editor. If you make any additional edits without complying, you may be blocked from editing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:12, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

You really need to comply with WP:PAID, based on what you've posted on your user page above, before making any more edits related to Amarula to any Wikipedia article. This has already been pointed out a few times above, but you still have failed to do so. If you're not sure what any of what's been posted above so far means, then that's OK. You should then seek assistance before moving forward. If you're not sure whether your previously stated connection to Amarula meets Wikipedia's definition of a "paid-contribution", that's OK too. In that case, you should seek clarification via Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Just assuming that your connection to Amarula makes it OK to edit Wikipedia content written about it is a mistake. If someone at Amarula or your immediate employer is directing you to edit/create content about Amarula on Wikipedia and not worry about Wikipedia policies and guidelines when doing so, then they are mistaken, and you should try to explain things like WP:BOSS to them. So far the discussion regarding this has been fairly amicable, but you continuing to do as you have been doing will lead to Wikipedia administrators being asked to get involved, which in turn could led to an administrator taking action against your account. None of that needs to happen, but you need to comply with WP:PAID asap. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2025 (UTC)

Hi @Marchjuly My sincere apologies. I have actually not seen all your messages on this page, apologies! I have honestly been trying my best to comply. The policy pages are rather lengthy and quite confusing, I have tried to read through most of them and believed the best direction was to make small adjustments with added comments of why the change was necessary. I want to keep the page information and not trying to edit to be an advert style article but rather just up to date and relevant information. I am more that happy to comply with WP:PAID, should I just write my statement in the "Paid-contribution disclosure" section above? Please assist me with the correct steps to take. I would really appreciate. Should I also change my username? Thank you for your guidance. WebGap (talk) 06:58, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

There's some information on how to disclose a COI and paid-editing connection given in WP:COIDISCLOSEPAY. You may use a template like {{Paid}} to make such a disclosure, or write your own disclosure containing the same information. The best place to probably make such a disclosure is going to be your WP:USERPAGE. You can then also make a similar disclosure at the top of Talk:Amarula and the talk pages any other articles you're being asked to work on. For article talk page declarations, the template {{Connected contributor (paid)}} works pretty well.

Once you've made the necessary declarations, you should use article talk pages to make WP:EDITREQUESTs for any changes you think should be made. In principle, you shouldn't be adding any new content or removing any existing content (text or images) on your own but propose such changes using edit requests. You should use the template {{COI edit}} to make such requests because the template is set up to let others know about your request. There are Wikipedians who try to help out by answering such requests, and one of them should respond. Since there can sometimes a bit of a backlog of requests, you probably shouldn't expect an immediate response, but someone should respond in a reasonable amount of time. It's important to remember that all Wikipedians are WP:VOLUNTEERs and do things at their own pace. If more than a week passes and nobody has yet to respond, you might be really tempted to just go ahead and make the changes yourself. I don't suggest you do this unless it's really a minor change or a clearcut Wikipedia policy violation like as explained in WP:COIADVICE. It's probably best to always err on the side of caution if you're not sure whether the change will be contentious and seek assistance from others.

As for edit requests, I don't suggest you request an entire/major re-writing of an article because that's most likely going to be passed over or just declined outright. Short and easy-to-understand requests (change A to B, add this image to that section, replace that link with this link, etc.) tend to be the easiest to respond to, whereas hard to figure out or asking for too much at once type of requests tend to take more time to answer. I also don't recommend flooding a talk page with edit requests (even short ones) because that kind of thing tends to not be viewed favorably; make one request at a time. Lastly, don't keep making the same request over and over again if it's been declined because this might eventually be seen as being disruptive or otherwise wasting time. If you have any more questions about the above or would like to get feedback from other Wikipedians, you can ask for help at WP:COIN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:34, 24 October 2025 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for sharing an account contrary to WP:NOSHARE.

If you believe that there are good reasons for being unblocked, please review Wikipedia's guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Primefac (talk) 04:27, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

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).

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

---

Request reason:

I acknowledge and accept the block.

The account was improperly shared among multiple users, which violated WP:NOSHARE. That was a mistake, and the account will not be shared again under any circumstances.

I also acknowledge that a paid-contribution disclosure related to consulting work was requested in October 2025 and was not added at the time. This was an oversight rather than an intentional attempt to conceal a conflict of interest.

At present I am unable to edit my user page due to the block. If unblocked, I will immediately add the required paid editing disclosure in compliance with the Wikimedia Terms of Use. Alternatively, if preferred, an administrator may add the

This user, in accordance with the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use, discloses that they have been paid by {{{employer}}} for their contributions to Wikipedia.

disclosure on my behalf.

If unblocked, I understand that I should not edit articles directly where I have a conflict of interest. Any future contributions will be limited to proposing changes on article talk pages only, with full transparency, or I will refrain from editing entirely.

I respectfully request an unblock so that I may either participate correctly under Wikipedia’s conflict-of-interest guidelines or retire the account properly if required.

Thank you for your time and consideration. WebGap (talk) 07:29, 13 January 2026 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Closing duplicate unblock request, as a newer one has been opened below. Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 09:57, 19 January 2026 (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.

Is WebGap the name of your agency? If so, you will need to request an unblock and account rename using the following template: {{Unblock-un|user=new username|reason=your reason here ~~~~}} voorts (talk/contributions) 04:25, 18 January 2026 (UTC)

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

---

Requested username:

ClaytonTimcke (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Yes, WebGap is the name of my consulting agency.

I understand that Wikipedia does not permit shared or organizational accounts, and I acknowledge that this contributed to the WP:NOSHARE violation.

I am requesting that this account be renamed to an individual username and unblocked. If unblocked and renamed, this account will be used by one individual only and will comply fully with Wikipedia’s conflict-of-interest and paid-contribution disclosure requirements.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

WebGap (talk) 08:49, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Accept reason:

I have unblocked. Welcome back. PhilKnight (talk) 02:59, 29 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I have renamed your account. To move the unblock request forward, it could be helpful to explain, in your own words, how you understood the conflict of interest requirements and what you should do to follow them. Remember, we prefer to hear from you, even if the wording might be less polished, rather than from an AI model. If you need any help with wording things, volunteers are here to help you! Chaotic Enby (talk · contribs) 10:04, 19 January 2026 (UTC)

Hi,

I now understand that because I work as a consultant for a client connected to the article, that creates a conflict of interest, even if my intention is just to keep information accurate or up to date. I didn’t fully understand how strict Wikipedia needs to be about this.

I also understand that I shouldn’t be editing articles directly, instead the right way to handle it is to suggest changes on the article’s talk page, ensuring relevant referencing is given, and leave it up to independent editors to decide what should or shouldn’t be changed.

I see now that Wikipedia articles aren’t controlled by the subject or people working with them, and that transparency matters more than intent. Going forward, I’ll follow that approach carefully, and if I’m ever unsure, I’ll rather step back than make a mistake.

Thanks again for your time and patience. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaytonTimcke (talk • contribs) 07:58, 20 January 2026 (UTC)

What do you intend to edit if unblocked? Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 05:02, 25 January 2026 (UTC)

Good day. Thanks for asking. If the account is unblocked, my intention would only be to suggest a few small updates where information on the Amarula page is outdated or no longer accurate.

This would mainly be things like clarifying older product information, suggesting updated images where appropriate, or correcting factual details, and only where I can provide proper references to support the change.

I understand now that these should be raised on the article’s talk page rather than edited directly, and that independent editors should decide whether the updates are made. I don’t plan to make major changes or rewrite the article, just to flag specific, well-sourced corrections where needed.

If there isn’t a reliable source for something, I wouldn’t request the change. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ClaytonTimcke (talk • contribs)

• @Primefac: - okay to unblock? PhilKnight (talk) 17:53, 28 January 2026 (UTC)

  My concern was the account sharing, so if that has been sorted out I have no further issue. Primefac (talk) 22:51, 28 January 2026 (UTC)