July 2018
edit
Hello, I'm Chrissymad. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Macomb, Illinois have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:22, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
No, Chrissymad, I don't believe you are correct. I simply added additional bullets to the event and attraction page. Also, you marked my edit adding the local public radio station as spam. How is that considered spam?
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 19:40, 11 July 2018 (UTC)Hello -
ScoopU (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I am not intentially spamming the Macomb, Illinois page and I believe I am following the proper protocal. I apologize if that is not the case and would ask that the information be added to the page is the correct was as everything I added is true and local and should be included. I have made three main changes to the page. 1. I added the local public radio station to the list of local news outlets thus requiring the title of the section to be changed from newspapers to news media. This is a real local radio news station that is located in Macomb. I included a link to the website as the two local papers also had. Second, I added to the list of attractions and events in Macomb because the list was missing many of the areas attractions and events. I includes links where I could to show sources as it states to do. This is not biased information. The links are to the organization or entities web page. Thirdly, I added to the list of outdoor recration opportunities. All of which are true, open, and located in Macomb. I would like to be unblocked and would like to see this information added to the page so that it better reflects Macomb's offerings because it is incomplete as it stands now and in some parts inaccurate. ScoopU (talk) 20:06, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
No reply to Boing!_said_Zebedee in over a week. SQLQuery me! 21:05, 7 August 2018 (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.
.
- In one edit summary you used the word "we". Who is "we"? 331dot (talk) 20:23, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
- I believe that what we're seeing here is not really spam but more of a WP:NOTDIRECTORY violation. The block looks correct in any case because "no I know better, I've been here for 2 weeks" is not a good response to warnings. ScoopU, are you interested in reading up on our rules and contributing something other than directory-type information? Max Semenik (talk) 21:59, 11 July 2018 (UTC)
Max Semenik - I work for a local news outlet here in town and myself and a collegue were trying to update the information. So that's the "we." We are non-profit and I don't have any agenda outside of wanting to add factual information to the page. Yes, I will keep reading because I am still not understanding how the information I added was spam. Yes, I am new here and the comment I made above was under the impression that the original spam comments were crticizing the validity of the information added. But, all the information contained is true and relevant to a local audience. But I was again told it was spam. I still don't understand exactly why. I've been reading, but there's a lot of information out there. Was it that I used outside links? Because those can be deleted. I was under the impression citing sources is good, but I've since noticed that the sources should be to other wikipedia pages. If that was the reason, I wish she would have just said that and made an edit, deleting the outside link, but instead the page was reverted back to a previous version which again made me think she believe the information added was false. I think that the fact that there's a public radio station on the university's campus should be information included when talking about local news media outlets. Why mention the papers but not the local radio station? Additionally, the lists of local events, attractions and places to visit already existed on the page, I only added more to it. So I don't understand how my edits could be considered creating a directory as the list already existed. Why should the things listed now be included, but not other events, attractions in town? So I'm still not clear on whether the information itself is considered spam, or the manner in which it was added and I will continue reading trying in an effort to determine the problem. ScoopU (talk) 13:17, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- Citing sources is necessary to support content additions; adding a bunch of external links without any content is, as mentioned above, a violation of WP:DIRECTORY. OhNoitsJamie Talk 14:39, 12 July 2018
(UTC)
Thank you, [[User talk:Ohnoitsjamie|. I had added a single link for each organization/event/attraction I added to the list. But I can avoid doing so in the future. So potentially the information itself could remain, if the accompanying links are removed? If its a formatting issue, those changes can be made rather than reverting the page back to old information. Can you provide any insight as to why the addition of the public radio station to the list of local news media would be considered spam? That was just a single entry that started the back and forth reverting and changing it back. ScoopU (talk) 15:54, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
- Once again, links are only part of the problem. I've pointed you at WP:NOTDIRECTORY but you're ignoring it. No, long lists of local businesses are not appropriate for encyclopedic articles, whether with links or not. Max Semenik (talk) 18:35, 12 July 2018 (UTC)
Yes, I hear you. I am asking a separate question. The first edit I made was just a single entry, taking the category of local media outlets from two entities to three - I don't believe thats a long list. So I was asking the issue with that entry. Under the rules about directory, it says "there is nothing wrong with having lists if their entries are relevant because they are associated with or significantly contribute to the list topic." All three of those entites are news media. Neither of the other two had any information outside of the name of the organization. But, I could add that. Regarding directories, many sections the page are formatted as lists. Does that mean those sections need to be reformatted in order to be edited and added to? ScoopU (talk) 11:11, 13 July 2018 (UTC)
- Late to the discussion, but as it appears the request for unblock is still open - I'd contend that this was a quick block and perhaps a bad one. While the user wasn't going about it in quite the right way, the material that they were looking to add to Macomb, Illinois was factual and, in my opinion, largely relevant. It would have been better, I feel, to have tried to educate the user on the proper way to add the material (i.e., perhaps as external links at the bottom of the article or, in the absence of individual links, a link to an area CVB that may have that material on their website) than to immediately resort to deletion of the material. As someone that lives about sixty miles from Macomb, I can vouch as to the accuracy of the information that the user was trying to add. I'd support an unblock and trying to help the user become better versed in Wikipedia's guidelines rather than being quick to the block button. StrikerforceTalk 17:50, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
- Pinging @Nihonjoe: as the admin that made the initial block for their reconsideration. StrikerforceTalk 17:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
- I don't have a problem with them being unblocked if they agree to abide by the rules and ask questions if they are not sure if it might break the rules. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:03, 18 July 2018 (UTC)
- @ScoopU:, so you agree to this condition? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 14:38, 31 July 2018 (UTC)
- Pinging @Nihonjoe: as the admin that made the initial block for their reconsideration. StrikerforceTalk 17:51, 18 July 2018 (UTC)