JWatTheDotECO

Welcome!

Hi JWatTheDotECO! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Learn more about editing

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

Get help at the Teahouse

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Volunteer at the Task Center

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

Possibly of interest to you

I think this may be of interest to you. If you control both accounts and have abandoned the other one, you should reply here. Please use {{re|davidwr}} so I get alerted. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:51, 12 November 2020 (UTC)

.eco trademark infringement

{{re|davidwr}}

Dear David,

I am in receipt of your email you continually removed our information and therefore I have no other alternative than to ask that you take down the misleading information for 2 reasons:

first - Big Room Inc. is infringing on our registered trademarks, .ECO®.

second - there is nothing on your page that verifies Big Room is the registry for the domain.

The following statement made by you, indicates Big Room Inc. has already been verified, "this page is about the top-level domain, not other uses of the terms ".ECO", ".eco", etc."

Can you please share the information and direct me to what guides your reasoning, as I cannot find anything verifying the "requirements and necessary approvals for delegation of the TLD and entry into the root-zone" were met for Big Rooms TLD use and advertisement of .eco, all in accordance with Article 1.1 ".eco Registry Agreement - ICANN" linked via reference #4 and US Trademark law.

Moreover, planet .ECO has had constructive nationwide priority to use ".eco" since 2008, year well ahead of the creation of the ".eco" gTLD page and years prior to the issuance of any of the top-level domains.

We have a duty to protect our trademark and ask that Wikipedia assist us in protecting it. Please remove the infringing content from its platform. The infringement is causing irreparable harm to our mark, .ECO® and company planet .ECO®.

Trademark Scope Registered marks related to .ECO® trademarks include: • Registration No. 3716170 is .ECO in standard-character form for “Design, creation, hosting and maintenance of internet sites for third parties; Hosting of digital content on the Internet; Providing specific information as requested by customers via the Internet, in Class 42.[2] • Registration No. 5813887 is .ECO and design for “Computerized database management,” in Class 35.[3] • Registration No. 5851826 is .ECO in standard-character form for “Advertisement for others on the Internet; advertising and marketing services, namely, promoting the goods and services of others; compilation of advertisements for use as web pages on the Internet; providing and rental of advertising space on the Internet,” in Class 35.[4]

Thank you,

Jean William JWatTheDotECO (talk) 00:49, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

First, it's just the green text in {{re|davidwr}}, NOT the markup around it that you don't see, that activates the notification system. I was NOT notified. Thankfully, I did have this page on my watch list.

Now, as to your question, I do think I am prepared to answer the question, so I am going to place an {{admin help}} template here. An administrator will see it and respond. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:45, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

Please see the discussions above, the recent edit history of .eco · ( talk | logs | history | links | watch ) · [revisions], the talk page and edit history of this user, JWatTheDotECO (talk · contribs), and the talk page and contributions of TheDotECO (talk · contribs), which may be the non-username-compliant account used by JWatTheDotECO prior to adopting a new name to comply with Wikipedia's username policy. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:45, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

To inform Wikipedia about this copyright matter, please follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Contact us/Licensing. 331dot (talk) 09:08, 13 November 2020 (UTC)

re|davidwr

Dear David:

I think you are misconstruing the information I place on Wikipedia as "frustration" with the registry operator. There is no frustration with Wikipedia nor the operator. However I find it interesting we are being barred updating Wikipedia with information about the ".eco" gTLD or Federally Registered Trademark.

More importantly, can you please provide me a response to the sandbox (draft) info I provided this weekend. I understand you may have issues replying via email and since I did not receive a response, please feel free to post it on the talk page.

Thank you.

First, please put four tilde characters, ~~~~, at the end of each message. This will "sign and date" your messages. Second, people will only get a "ping" (see WP:Notifications) if you put "re|their name" inside a set of double-curly-braces, like so: {{re|davidwr}} AND you sign the message, all in the same edit.

As for the draft, the page .eco is about the domain name and, by extension, the registrar. It is not about the term ".eco", ".ECO", "[picture of the Earth]eco" or any other variation. The reason for this is that it is the domain name itself that is "notable" not the term, its trademarks, etc. To the extend that trademark disputes are included in the article, they should be there as supporting material about the domain name, not "just because."

I am not seeing any sandbox draft in your contribution history or your account's logs, which is where it would show up if the page had been deleted. If you mean User:TheDotECO/sandbox, that page was deleted by Fastily on November 13, with the reason "U5 Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host. Since it has been deleted, I cannot see it to comment on it. But if an administrator deleted it for that reason, consider it "un-salvageable." davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:13, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Managing a conflict of interest

Hello, JWatTheDotECO. We welcome your contributions, but if you have an external relationship with the people, places or things you have written about in the page .eco, 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 WP:Spam);
• 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. Cabayi (talk) 09:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cabayi,

Can you please identify the source of the Conflict of Interest?

November 2020

Your recent edits could give Wikipedia contributors the impression that you may consider legal or other "off-wiki" action against them, or against Wikipedia itself. Please note that making such threats on Wikipedia is strictly prohibited under Wikipedia's policies on legal threats and civility. Users who make such threats may be blocked. If you have a dispute with the content of any page on Wikipedia, please follow the proper channels for dispute resolution. Please be sure to comment on content, not contributors, and where possible make specific suggestions for changes supported by reliable independent sources and focusing especially on verifiable errors of fact. Thank you. Your comments to davidwr kept just short of the threshold of a legal threat - please be aware of the prohibition which is absolute. Cabayi (talk) 10:01, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Cabayi Thank you for posting this. I agree - JWatTheDotECO was "just short" of the threshold. However, I'm assuming good faith and understand his frustration. If I were in his shoes, I would be frustrated as well - not so much at Wikipedia but at the overall dispute his company is having with the entity managing the ".eco" top-level internet domain name. Given the nature of the complaint, it is unlikely that the image he wants removed will be removed by the community, at least not for as long as it is associated with the ".eco" top-level internet domain.

I will say this: The editor IS making some useful contributions, even with the obvious conflict of interest (example). This is a pleasant surprise - most people coming to Wikipedia with requests on behalf of clients or employers are not nearly as willing to engage the community on the community's terms. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 16:57, 15 November 2020 (UTC)

Hello Cabayi|Cabayi,

My contributions below corrected the errors you have restored on the .eco Wikipadia Page.

Is there a justifiable reason you declared the contributions as "spam"? Please clarify as the information I provided is accurate and had all citations.

Contributions I provided are as follows(Revision as of 18:58, 14 November 2020) -

.eco is a top-level domain (TLD). It was proposed in ICANN's new generic top-level domain (gTLD) program and became available to the general public on April 25, 2017.[2][3]

The company was recommended for delegation after passing an ICANN community priority evaluation[4] and assembling a coalition of more than 50 environmental organizations[5]. Delegation for Registry Operator approval, in accordance with Article 1.1 of the .eco registry agreement[6] remains unknown. The registry is advised by a council of these organizations.[7]

JWatTheDotECO (talk) 19:42, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

"The company" - what company? You removed Big Room from the text.

From the wiki's perspective, neither company appears to rise to the level of satisfying the notability threshold for businesses and organisations WP:NORG on their own merits, and there's nothing notable about the trademark. The only notable item is the gTLD. In that context, and given your position, removing Big Room from the text appeared to me as petty promotionalism. Cabayi (talk) 22:38, 16 November 2020 (UTC)

Email received. Please communicate about content "on-wiki"

You sent me an email. Matters related to content such as this should be discussed out in the open. If you would like me to address those issues, please re-post the email here. I have this talk page on my WP:Watchlist and I check Wikipedia at least every day or two, so I should see any message you or anyone else posts here. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:43, 30 November 2020 (UTC)

Please do not directly edit pages in which you have a conflict of interest

I reverted your edit to .eco both on editorial grounds - it hurt, rather than helped, the article - and on WP:Conflict of interest grounds.

Because of your conflict of interest, you should be using Template:Requested edit on Talk:.eco rather than editing the page directly.

You can read more about how to manage a conflict of interest in an earlier message on this page, § Managing a conflict of interest. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 22:22, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:ECO Registered Logo.png

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:ECO Registered Logo.png. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 03:34, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

Disregard, I have corrected the description as this file consists only of letters and simple shapes and is therefore not eligible for copyright in the United States. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:36, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

File:ECO Registered Logo.png missing description details

Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as:

• File:ECO Registered Logo.png

is missing information on its image description page, which would help other contributors make make better use of the image, and make that page more informative to readers.

If possible, please add this information, otherwise the image may eventually be proposed for deletion, a situation which is not desirable, and which can easily be avoided. Please also consider updating other files you created or uploaded, You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you.

davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:55, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

The same applies to File:PlanetECOLogo.png. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 20:35, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

Your ping

I nearly missed your {{ping}} due to a typo. I did see it when I noticed Talk:.eco in my watchlist.

You do have a point about fairness. I've addressed that issue on the .eco talk page. I hope my interim solution - which is admittedly sub-optimal - will allow the article to be stable for long enough to figure out a long-term solution. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 21:49, 2 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. You appear to be repeatedly reverting or undoing other editors' contributions at .eco. Although this may seem necessary to protect your preferred version of a page, on Wikipedia this is known as "edit warring" and is usually seen as obstructing the normal editing process, as it often creates animosity between editors. Instead of reverting, please discuss the situation with the editor(s) involved and try to reach a consensus on the talk page.

If editors continue to revert to their preferred version they are likely to lose their editing privileges on that page. This isn't done to punish an editor, but to prevent the disruption caused by edit warring. In particular, editors should be aware of the three-revert rule, which says that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Edit warring on Wikipedia is not acceptable in any amount, and violating the three-revert rule is very likely to result in loss of your editing privileges. Thank you. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:40, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

The rules against edit-warring, or more precisely the spirit behind them - that we are supposed to be working together to build an encyclopedia - is why I haven't reverted many of your changes more than once in a short period of time. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 03:43, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Hello JWatTheDotECO. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to .eco, 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 compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. 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 very 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 extremely 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:JWatTheDotECO. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=JWatTheDotECO|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. The above is a "standard template" message that can be found at Template:uw-paid1. I will follow up with a customized message shortly. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:27, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Customized follow-up, Response required: Your keen interest in .eco strongly suggests that you have a conflict of interest with respect to that topic. Frequently, such conflicts of interest involve employment by or other financial connections to a company. Before editing further, please read Wikipedia:Paid-contributions disclosure and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and state that you have done so. If you are required to disclose, do so. If you are not, please stipulate that you are not in your response. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 15:36, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

In response to all messages received from Wikipedia today -

I DISAGREE. JWatTheDotECO (talk) 16:53, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

To clarify, do you disagree that you qualify under the definition of a paid editor and under the definition of an editor with a conflict of interest? davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 17:31, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Your recent editing history at .eco shows that you are currently engaged in an edit war; that means that you are repeatedly changing content back to how you think it should be, when you have seen that other editors disagree. To resolve the content dispute, please do not revert or change the edits of others when you are reverted. Instead of reverting, please use the talk page to work toward making a version that represents consensus among editors. The best practice at this stage is to discuss, not edit-war. See the bold, revert, discuss cycle for how this is done. If discussions reach an impasse, you can then post a request for help at a relevant noticeboard or seek dispute resolution. In some cases, you may wish to request temporary page protection.

Being involved in an edit war can result in you being blocked from editing—especially if you violate the three-revert rule, which states that an editor must not perform more than three reverts on a single page within a 24-hour period. Undoing another editor's work—whether in whole or in part, whether involving the same or different material each time—counts as a revert. Also keep in mind that while violating the three-revert rule often leads to a block, you can still be blocked for edit warring—even if you do not violate the three-revert rule—should your behavior indicate that you intend to continue reverting repeatedly.
Techie3 (talk) 11:26, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Please do not revert .eco any further - and be aware of 3RR

@JWatTheDotECO: Per the conversation at Talk:.eco#A_Path_Forward_For_This_Page we ask you to please cease any further revisions of the .eco page. If you continue to revert the page to your version that promotes your company and info, despite repeated attempts by multiple editors to help explain how Wikipedia works, you will be in violation of the WP:3RR rule and could have your account blocked from further editing for a period of 24 hours or more. Please instead engage with us on the Talk page about a path forward to get this page updated. Thank you. - Dyork (talk) 15:39, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of Dispute resolution noticeboard discussion

This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding reason. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help this dispute come to a resolution. The thread is ".eco".The discussion is about the topic .eco.

Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you!

--davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:37, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of edit warring noticeboard discussion

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion involving you at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring regarding a possible violation of Wikipedia's policy on edit warring. The thread is Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring#User:JWatTheDotECO reported by User:Techie3 (Result: ). Thank you. Techie3 (talk) 11:33, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

February 2021

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for edit warring, as you did at .eco. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions.

During a dispute, you should first try to discuss controversial changes and seek consensus. If that proves unsuccessful, you are encouraged to seek dispute resolution, and in some cases it may be appropriate to request page protection.

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 ~~~~}}.  Lourdes 13:08, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

Please stop attacking other editors, as you did on Talk:.eco. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. Comment on content, not on other contributors or people. The statement: 'I actually tried to understood your baffling then remembered you do not know how to read the Federal Contracts, have no clue about intellectual property and constantly deflect due to your shortcoming. ' is insulting, and is a personal attack.

Discussion is still in progress at WP:AN. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)

Notice of noticeboard discussion

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:10, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for abuse of editing privileges.

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 ~~~~}}.

This block only applies to the .eco page and has been imposed following consensus reached at WP:AN. You are free to raise any concerns with the article at talk:.eco. Mjroots (talk) 07:30, 11 February 2021 (UTC)

The facts regarding .eco disinformation remain the same.

Worst, .ECO® is being blocked and/or barred market entry by you and others who, since 2017, continue labeling .eco as something operated by a foreign entity that has no legal bases and should have been disqualified based on something you understand all too well - Conflict of Interest. Let's not forget foreign Big Room Inc's co-founder Mr. Jacob Malthouse was a board member and key executive of ICANN, while applying for ".eco" gTLD.

I still have only 1 question that Wikipedia editors have yet to answer about the .eco gTLD delegation. Says Who? Meaning - who authorized the gTLD delegation of ".eco" you believe foreign Big Room Inc. won?. We know it was not the USPTO or DoC agency, as required per SA1301-12-CN-0035, section C.2.9.2d and G1. See Appendix below?

Neutral Wikipedia continue to propagate unverified information, despite 10-years of activities and events shown below

Big Room, Inc., a Canadian Corporation with offices in Connecticut, was made actually aware of the planet .ECO®, LLC. mark as early as 3/30/2009, when its application for a phonetically similar word-mark was denied by the USPTO on likelihood of confusion grounds under Trademark Act §2(d).

On 8/28/2016, Big Room was designated the registry operator of the .ECO gTLD—whose registry services are provided by Afilias—and began registering .ECO gTLDs in 2017.

Below are .ECO gTLD related activities since 2008. These are efforts made by companies founded by former ICANN board members to legalize ownership of .eco. Some would say foreign Big Room Inc's trademark front-running began as early as 2008.

1. On July 15, 2008 Big Room Inc. submitted trademark application # 77523010, and was refused, dismissed, or invalidated by the Office, due to likelihood of confusion with “.eco” mark(s) owned by .ECO®.

2. On July 15, 2008 Big Room Inc. submitted trademark application # 77523015, and was refused, dismissed, or invalidated by the Office, due to likelihood of confusion with “.eco” mark(s) owned by .ECO®.

3. On January 8, 2009 Big Room Inc submitted trademark application # 77646029 and was refused, dismissed, or invalidated by the Office, due to likelihood of confusion with “.eco” mark(s) owned by .ECO®.

4. On January 4, 2010 Doteco LLC filed USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92051924 against .ECO® predecessor. On January 9, 2012, the litigation was Dismissed with Prejudice.

5. On February 17, 2012 Big Room Inc filed USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92055197 against .ECO®. On July 16, 2013, the litigation was Dismissed.

6. On April 12, 2012 Top Level Domain Holdings Inc. (TLDH), founded and operated by former ICANN Chair, Board Members and Key Executives, filed USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92055469 against .ECO®. On November 2, 2012 the litigation was Dismissed.

7. On November 20, 2014 Big Room Inc filed USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92060403 against .ECO®. On May 28, 2015 the litigation was Dismissed.

8. On May 29, 2015 USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 92060403 was cured by Big Room Inc. and on July 17, 2015 again, Dismissed.

9. On 8/28/2016, Big Room was designated the registry operator of the .ECO gTLD and 006Fn September 9, 2016 Big Room Inc filed and was granted a 90 Day Extension of time to investigate and Oppose .ECO® “.eco” application serial # 86846214. On December 14, 2016 Big Room Inc followed up by filing USPTO TTABVUE. Proceeding Number 91231750 against .ECO®. On May 7, 2019, the trademark proceeding was Dismissed w/ Prejudice.

10. On February 7, 2017 Big Room Inc submitted trademark application # 87327563. On September 4, 2019 that application was refused, dismissed, or invalidated by the Office, due to likelihood of confusion with “.eco” mark(s) owned by .ECO®. In March 2020 the application was deemed abandoned and dead by the Trademark Office.

JWatTheDotECO (talk) 13:49, 22 February 2021 (UTC) JWatTheDotECO (talk) 13:59, 22 February 2021 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of File:PlanetECOLogo.png

The file File:PlanetECOLogo.png has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Unused logo of unnotable company. See Special:Contribs/JWatTheDotECO. Out of scope.

While all constructive contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, pages may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated files}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the file's talk page.

Please consider addressing the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated files}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. In particular, the speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and files for discussion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. --Minorax^«¦talk¦» 14:54, 7 August 2022 (UTC)