User talk:[email protected]

When adding authoritative information, it helps to know the source of the authoritative information. There are thousands of people with my name in the world, but only one that actually writes Adobe Photoshop. Disambiguating myself from the voice actor, comedian, DJ, horse rider, country singer, US representative, racing drive, conductor, etc. bearing the same name requires that I include something with my user name that denotes WHICH Chris Cox I am. (BTW - you may wish to review old naming policies that encouraged my current name on wikipedia) As for conflict of interest: I am editing nothing that promotes or denigrates Adobe or it's competitors (though I have had to remove defacement that denigrated one or the other). I am primarily correcting information on the product that I write (since I know it rather well), and correcting related topics that needed better information. [email protected] (talk) 22:10, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Sorry, but:

• It doesn't matter who adds text to our articles. What matters, however, is that all information must be based on what was published in reliable, secondary sources. As such, it doesn't matter what your username is - "Chris Cox at Adobe", "Emperor of Universe" or "Chris123456789", it doesn't change anything in editing process and does not give you any privileges.
• Still, as you appear to be an Adobe employee and our conflict of interest policy highly recommends you to abstain from editing in areas related to Adobe. If you choose to continue, please familiarize yourself with it thoroughly.
  • And although we don't block on sight for edits like this one, you should be extremely cautious on talk pages too as people might think that Adobe suppresses even discussion on some topics if you remove others' comments like that (I know, most likely you did that unintentinally).
• Our username policy prohibits names like yours, so unfortunately you'll need to pick another username to be unblocked - see above how to do it. I don't remember what that policy said in 2005 when you signed up, but a lot of things have changed since then and we don't grandfather everything that was so long before.

Max Semenik (talk) 22:49, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

Think about this for a minute: Who can state what language Photoshop is written in? Only the engineers working on the team know that, and would write about it. But they cannot present the information according to your policies, and cannot correct misinformation according to your policies. Who can verify such information if it were published by another source that may have gotten it wrong (and several have)? Only the engineers on the team could correct that. You have created circular logic that leads to promotion of misinformation, and cannot allow correction of that information by anyone with actual knowledge of the topic. How do we solve that? [email protected] (talk) 23:07, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply

You have another logical inconsistency: anyone is allowed to edit, but you reject information when it is identified as coming from someone with firsthand knowledge about the topic. That means the same person can post identical information without their ID, but cannot post the information with their ID. This, of course, also implies that anyone can post misinformation with or without an ID, and that information cannot be disputed by those with firsthand knowledge if they identify themselves. This logically means that wikipedia will consist of hearsay and not verifiable information, if the current rules are not changed. [email protected] (talk) 23:30, 12 January 2014 (UTC)Reply