User talk:Alimander

July 2011

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended or used for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully.

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, celebrity or other well-known individual, 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. See WP:FAQ/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, or organization. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

What can I do now?

You are still welcome to write about something other than your company or organization. If you do intend to make useful contributions on 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.

If you believe this block was made in error, please see how to appeal a block. v/r - T P 14:57, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

SashaMaju (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I understand that the external links I have added have been considered as edits for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. I am disputing the alleged infringement as I am trying to make a specific contribution to Wikipedia that makes connections between archived video material as a resource and textual information. Most of the links I added were to EngageMedia.org because this is a site that houses video on a range of topics, all with creative commons licenses. Because EngageMedia provides a video platform for the Asia Pacific, much of this video information comes from the subjects of the videos themselves. EngageMedia neither takes a stand on these videos or makes a comment, nor is it in any way commercial. In a sense, it acts as video encyclopedia and as such, in my view, Wikipedia should recognise the resource for what it is. The EngageMedia pages that have the embedded videos do not have links that lead readers to a specific commercial site. I do not think these violate the spam policy of Wikipedia. While the EngageMedia pages are not the official site associated with the Wikipedia article, many of these articles do not have 'official sites' and the videos on EngageMedia are the closest thing that may exist to such a thing. I am passionate about understanding how more links can be made between video and textual encyclopedic information and I would appreciate any help in doing so. Thankyou.

For all the links I added, I made a proper assessment of whether they added value to the article. I watched them all and consider them valuable video references (I am a professional researcher of visual culture). I have read Wikipedia:External links and I am disappointed that videos housed on the EngageMedia website cannot be considered in line with Wikipedia's policies. The EngageMedia site is very different from YouTube. I look forward to a time when these policies are reexamined. I will leave the disagreement there and state that I will not add any more links to EngageMedia videos. I do intend to make useful contributions to Wikipedia (most of my previous edits have been fixing spelling and grammatical errors) and I will continue in this way if unblocked.

I also notice that there were issues with this edit. I think my intentions have been misunderstood here. The previous link was broken because the domain name had expired, and as for many people in Indonesia, the groups in question had had difficulty renewing it without a credit card. They had asked me to temporarily house the website on www.alimander.com and to redirect dead links while it was there, which I did, and this included on Wikipedia. I didn't realise this would be considered a conflict of interest. As it is, please remove the link and I will not volunteer to help people in this manner in the future. These things happen because not everybody has the same ease of access to the internet and a presence on it.

Decline reason:

From reviewing your contributions, these have mainly been adding links to videos on the EngageMedia website without a proper assessment of whether they add value to the article. On the basis of your message here it seems that's what you intend to continue doing if unblocked. Please take the time to read Wikipedia:External links as this is not in line with Wikipedia's policies (see in particular WP:YOUTUBE). Nick-D (talk) 07:13, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Blocking admin remarks to reviewing admin I leave it to your discretion, but please take a look at this edit in addition to the 10+ EngageMedia links.--v/r - T P 05:03, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

SashaMaju (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

For all the links I added, I made a proper assessment of whether they added value to the article. I watched them all and consider them valuable video references (I am a professional researcher of visual culture). I have read Wikipedia:External links and I am disappointed that videos housed on the EngageMedia website cannot be considered in line with Wikipedia's policies. The EngageMedia site is very different from YouTube. I look forward to a time when these policies are reexamined.

I will leave the disagreement there and state that I will not add any more links to EngageMedia videos. I do intend to make useful contributions to Wikipedia (most of my previous edits have been fixing spelling and grammatical errors) and I will continue in this way if unblocked.

I also notice that there were issues with this edit. I think my intentions have been misunderstood here. The previous link was broken because the domain name had expired, and as for many people in Indonesia, the groups in question had had difficulty renewing it without a credit card. They had asked me to temporarily house the website on www.alimander.com and to redirect dead links while it was there, which I did, and this included on Wikipedia. I didn't realise this would be considered a conflict of interest. As it is, please remove the link and I will not volunteer to help people in this manner in the future. These things happen because not everybody has the same ease of access to the internet and a presence on it.

Accept reason:

OK, you are unblocked but you should immediately create a new account with the name SashaMaju. We will expect you to adhere to your promise not to add links to any site you are associated with. Thank you, EdJohnston (talk) 18:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've notified the blocking admin at User talk:TParis#Alimander requesting unblock and asked him to comment on your latest unblock request. EdJohnston (talk) 16:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm satisfied as long as Alimander understands that changing their username doesn't exempt them from the WP:COI policy.--v/r - T P 17:33, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]