Hi, Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for the editing. I have read your doubts in help desk. While linking, you should follow these instructions. And you should also remember that never use Wikipedia as a reference because itself it is an untrusted source. Hope you'll keep it in mind next time. More doubts can be clarified at Teahouse, a friendly place to learn all about editing. You can also ask in my talk page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BenisonPBaby (talk • contribs) 07:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
- Why can't I edit Wikipedia?
Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, website or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.
- Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?
Probably not, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again.
- What can I do now?
If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.
If you do intend to make useful contributions here about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:
- Add the text
{{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}}on your user talk page. - Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers to search for available usernames. Your new username will need to meet our username policy.
- Replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason to be unblocked. In this reason, you must:
- Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the edits for which you were blocked.
- Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Alexf(talk) 09:46, 5 August 2013 (UTC)
Abandoned america (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I run a website that has image galleries of abandoned buildings. I have included them in a handful of external links (such as to the SS United States or AMARG) not because I am trying to sell anything but because (a) I have seen many other such links in external references and (b) they directly relate to the subject. I did not think this was a problem as, again, I have seen many, many other links to image galleries. Last night I noticed that 3 of the links had been taken down and posted a query as to why. Rather than explaining to me what the reasoning was, my account was blocked indefinitely even from my own user talk page, and one editor claimed that I had only linked to two thumbnail images when in fact the thumbnails lead to subgalleries of images taken at different times. If it is some horrible faux pas to list the same sort of external reference link I have seen on many, many wikipedia pages (99% of whom are created by the people whose image websites are being linked to), I will never do it again. I asked why I was being singled out and the discussion could have ended at telling me that I shouldn't do it any more. Blocking my entire account when I was trying to get some clarity on the situation is frankly nasty and an overreaction. The website that I was linking to, abandonedamerica.us, is one I have run for nearly a decade and had been featured on the Huffington Post, NBC Nightly News, the Metro and Daily Mail, Nouvel Obs, and NRK, to name a few, and I have collected images of hundreds of buildings that are now destroyed. I thought that offering people the chance to see them before they were gone would be a valuable contribution to their history. Blocking my account is unnecessary as I will not repost. It would have been nice if you could have at least reasonably discussed the matter instead of barring me from the entire site, as I personally brought up the issue to request clarification. I did not act in bad faith and shutting down my whole account is an overreaction. Sincerely, Matthew
Decline reason:
Hi Matthew! You have been blocked from editing simply on the basis of your username. Wikipedia's username policy specifically prohibits usernames that represent a group, organization, website, etc. You should also avoid adding links to your website because this constitutes a conflict of interest. If you understand our username policy and conflict-of-interest guideline, and would like to continue editing, please add this code below: {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}}. Thanks. Jujutacular (talk) 14:06, 7 August 2013 (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.