Ddurant100

Welcome!

Hello, Ddurant100, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Northern Border Partners, LP, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles. See the Article Wizard.

Thank you.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

• Your first article
• Biographies of living persons
• How to write a great article
• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Help pages
• Tutorial

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 have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Derek Andrews (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Northern Border Partners, LP

A tag has been placed on Northern Border Partners, LP requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Derek Andrews (talk) 16:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Southern Union Co.

A tag has been placed on Southern Union Co. requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. -- BigDom 17:01, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Uil Holding Corporation

A tag has been placed on Uil Holding Corporation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for organizations and companies. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 17:34, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

September 2009

If you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Uil Holding Corporation, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

1. editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with;
2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors; and
3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).

Please familiarize yourself with relevant policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. For more details about what, exactly, constitutes a conflict of interest, please see our conflict of interest guidelines. Thank you. You appear to be creating a large number of small articles each with a reference to a domain name registered to David Durant. Wikipedia is not meant as a means of promoting your own website. noq (talk) 17:36, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Please stop creating articles listing your own wiki as a reference. For one thing, Wikipedia is not to be used to drive traffic to your site. For another thing, Wikis are not generally considered reliable sources. Since all of your articles merely posit the existence of a company, and then direct users to your site, your postings can be considered spam. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 18:21, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for spam, advertising, or promotion. If you believe this block is unjustified you may contest this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 18:46, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

As an aside, I am absolutely livid at the amount of work you have created for a registered charity. The spamming of your site - and it is patently yours due to the similarity between your username and the name of the 'creator' of wikiwealth - has created at least an hour's worth of work in reverting the additions. This hour would be better spent securing funding for our third-world educational projects. Please read WP:BFAQ and WP:SPAM, as well as WP:COI, before requesting an unblock. Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry (talk) 18:56, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Teck Como

A tag has been placed on Teck Como, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Williams Partners L.P.

A tag has been placed on Williams Partners L.P., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Duoyuan Global Water

A tag has been placed on Duoyuan Global Water, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:02, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of MarkWest Energy Partners LP

A tag has been placed on MarkWest Energy Partners LP, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Checo Power

A tag has been placed on Checo Power, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ormat Technologies

A tag has been placed on Ormat Technologies, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Lifeway Foods

A tag has been placed on Lifeway Foods, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of Ennis, Inc.

A tag has been placed on Ennis, Inc., requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. noq (talk) 19:03, 30 September 2009 (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).

Ddurant100 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Hello, I was blocked for referencing information from my own wiki when creating new company descriptions for large international public companies, which had no previous Wikipedia.org pages. I assumed in my diligence that I had to reference at least one outside page to gain credibility for the information. I link all the pages to the correct stock exchange and other side information, but I recycled my own work for the text reference. I’m truly story for this. I could use yahoo, google, or maybe the actual company page would have been best, but I did not have their links in my database. Would this have solved the problem that led to my blocking?

The outside reference is irrelevant to my objective though. I was not looking to spam, so I assumed a reference was the least visible, but acceptable, means to gain information credibility. My only objective was to create the pages so that I could reference Wikipedia on my own site. (see example on company tab: Wikiwealth.com/research:mmm). I’m trying to promote the use of Wikipedia by sending users to information gathered on Wikipedia pages. However, for over a thousand very large and significant companies, there is absolutely no information available on Wikipedia. I created the short summaries in the hope that other users would not be intimidated about adding additional company information to those short summaries, because a page already existed. My only goal was a robust company description for those thousand unrepresented companies.

If you can suggest a better way to achieve this goal, I’m completely open to ideas. I presume, the means I utilized were an unfortunately shortcut that I will not repeat. I just wanted to get a thousand pages quickly completed, so I could move on with developing my own company to utilize Wikipedia.org’s stores of knowledge. If unblocked, I would quickly delete the references and make any other changes per your request. Would it be acceptable to continue my work of expanding Wikipedia.org’s library of public company information without reference any outside sites? Please advise. Thank you.

Decline reason:

"My only objective was to create the pages so that I could reference Wikipedia on my own site. " sounds like WP:Advocacy. Solid block. Toddst1 (talk) 14:23, 1 October 2009 (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.

You won't be unblocked if you intend to continue to add references to your own site. See WP:COI and WP:Reliable sources. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 21:55, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I would add that you should also read WP:ORG. Just because a company is listed on a stock exchange just not automatically make them notable. noq (talk) 23:33, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

I don't intend to add reference to my site or any other sites. I only wanted to create a good enough page that others would continue to edit. That was my only objective. Since these are public companies, they have a tremendous amount of pertinent and notable information that any analyst in the world would want to know. I'm not talking mom and pop type of operations. These companies are some of the biggest and note worthy companies in their respective industries and countries. Some employ thousands of works and have a market value of billions of dollars. They produce cutting edge technology and innovations, but no one knows to look for them at Wikipedia, because no one created a page for them yet. Some are foreign, but they are still very notable, because they absolutely dominate their local economies. I was surprised that no one bothered to create a page for this thus far. I assumed the biggest hurdle was creating the page, because simply editing a page is easy once it's already started. If unblocked, I'll go back and fix (delete) all the references I've created. It's my fault. I'll clean them up immediately. If you have any other request, I'll take care of them right away. Thank you.

Creating a page is easy. Adding sufficient reliable secondary references to prove the notability (wikipedia's definition of notability may not be the same as yours) of the topic is trickier. So is finding enough encyclopaedic material to be able to expand the article beyond a stub. Please also bear in mind that wikipedia is a source of information for the general public, not particular user groups such as business analysts, though they are of course welcome. Another indicator of the usefullness of an article is the number of pages linking to it (see what links here in the toolbox in the sidebar).--Derek Andrews (talk) 10:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Many of these companies are found on list and articles already on Wikipedia, but when you click the link, there is no information, so I created a page to start the conversation. I'm trying to work on more thorough articles, but that process is going to take several months. It's work done by editors I've hired, so when it's done, I can post the information on Wikipedia. A paragraph of information is better than a stub, but is that good enough? None of the articles I intend to create for Wikipedia cater in any way to stock analyst, they would rather go to my site for that information. But when people want to understand a company, I refer them to Wikipedia. When there is no information for over a thousand companies, I can't refer them anywhere.

{{unblock|User has acknowledged reasons for block, and has pledged to follow policies and guidelines with future edits (per conversation below unblock template)}}

Your reasoning seems somewhat circular. You are creating pages on your wiki that reference Wikipedia as a source. When users of your site follow that link, they would come to a page on Wikipedia whose only citation is back to your site. In addition to the inherent circularity of that reasoning, Wikipedia commonly claims that it is not itself a valid reference source for most serious scholarly inquiries, due to the user-edited (and often user-vandalized) nature of the beast. Your desire to add valuable information to Wikipedia is laudable, but the information you were adding is not valuable as it is not verifiable. And rather than stop and ask for direction when you were warned multiple times about that problem, you continued to add unverifiable information. This is why you were blocked. And since you don't seem willing to change that pattern, you are unlikely to be unblocked. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:01, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Alright, now we are getting somewhere. The reasoning is confusing, thus I made mistakes and I'm having a hard time explaining my objective. I am trying to send people to Wikipedia. Only one direction. I mistakenly creating the original references to my site to source the content that my site produced. This is the circular part. I thought this was the protocol for any piece of information added to Wikipedia. I was trying to follow some rules, but inadvertently broke others as a consequence. This was the big mistake, and I've apologized for it and don't ever attend to make it again. I'll just source the company's own websites, but this will take considerable time to gather the appropriate level of information. When users follow the link to Wikipedia, they stay at Wikipedia. That's it. Not malicious. The reasoning behind this is the most difficult to understand and the reason you don't believe me. If there is a lack of relevant / neutral commentary on a particular company, then people on my site can't do the appropriate level of company investigation. I'm trying to fix the information gap problem. As unreliable as you claim Wikipedia to be, the information on message board are downright fraudulent in nature. The more information the better, and Wikipedia gathers information the best even if it's only 80% accurate. Wikipedia is much less likely to be fraud. The pages were added very quickly, so I didn't understand the full extent of the problem, nor saw the warnings, until I was blocked. I interpreted the warnings I've read to mean I need more content, but not that my reference was inappropriate.

My previous pattern for creating these pages was: 1. Basic content: I originally have one to two completely relevant sentences,... In the future, I'm working to greatly improve the content on the initial pages. 2. Site reference: I referenced my site, because it was the source of the content.... In the future, I'll reference the actual companies website instead. 3. Reliable Sources: I used content generated my company, although we provide relevant and unbiased company details, there is an inherent bias.... In the future, we'll provide only third party content and sources.

Tell me what I need to add to the list. I'm really trying to be transparent here. Thank you.

Not all companies are inherently notable. See WP:CORP for company notability guidelines, especially the section requiring that reliable, third-party references be provided. Linking to the companies own site or press releases does not establish notability. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 19:45, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

To expand on Jamie's comment: unless you can reference significant coverage in reliable third party sources (see verifiability guidelines and reliable sources definitions), the company doesn't really rate a Wikipedia article. WikiDan61^ChatMe!_ReadMe!! 19:49, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

That's what tripped me up. I rated my own content as a reliable third party source.... don't jump on me for that, I completely understand now. Then that's it, I'll just have to find other reliable third party sources of information, but that's easy since these are massive public companies with thousands of employees, numerous press releases, third party commentary and extremely large and influential businesses that generate groundbreaking innovations. I didn't add mom and pop's pizzeria.

What else do I need to do to get unblocked?

If you do get unblocked, and it sounds to me like you are moving in the right direction, I would suggest that you create a sandbox in your user space, ie User:Ddurant100/draft to create your first article and ask for help and review from experienced users. When the article reaches a satisfactory minimum standard it is an easy job to move it to its proper home. That might save an awful lot of aggravation all around. You might like to join Wikipedia:WikiProject Companies as i am sure the folks there will be best placed to help you create top-notch articles on this topic.

One other possible stumbling block. You said somewhere that you are paying editors to write for you. Somewhere, and I can't find it now, I am sure that I have seen wikipedia policy on writing for pay.--Derek Andrews (talk) 20:36, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hello Derek, You're right. The sandbox is the first place I'd go to get this right before attempting to create pages. The editors write for my company, that's why I got this issue wrong when I reference the work they did. Although I wrote these pages myself, I'll make sure to avoid any potential issues that you mentioned. I can only assume the policy meant that I should avoid hiring people to write these pages or add content for me. That makes sense.

One questions. Could I create all the necessary pages on my sandbox and then publish them on Wikipedia only after I get approval for each? Can others view my sandbox and help add content?

Others can see your sandbox (if they know its name). They can edit it too, but it is not proper for them to do so. It would be better to use the associated talk page to coach you. Once you are over the hurdle of getting your first page done, I am sure there will be no need for further assistance, though of course everything you do will be subject to alteration and criticism as is any other page on wikipedia. Your first page doesn't have to be a masterpiece, a stub is fine, just so long as it demonstrates the notability of the subject and ability of the article to be expanded in due course.

Based on your comments above and your apparent willingness to work within existing guidelines, I would support your request for removal of your block, and would encourage an admin to do so.

In the mean time, you might like to peruse the requirements for getting an article to good article status. A lofty goal, but it may give you a better indication of what wikipedia strives to achieve.--Derek Andrews (talk) 23:03, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Derek. I'm just looking to get some experience on the sandbox page before venturing back in to the public domain. This should have been my first step.

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

Ddurant100 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

I was blocked, then unblocked, but I still can't edit pages. This all happened a while ago and I'm not sure what else has to be done. Can someone please unblock me and/or explain what's happening to my account?

Accept reason:

From what I can tell an administrator agreed to remove the block all the way back in 2009, but forgot to actually unblock you! You should be able to edit now, sorry for the inconvenience. Beeblebrox (talk) 21:05, 24 January 2011 (UTC)