User talk:Barkfox

Removal of link

Hallo Barkfox, and thanks for your question. I removed that link because this is a general article about UNESCO, and what you inserted is a link about the personal web site of a specific person. There are several guidelines in wikipedia, which forbid it: for example WP:UNDUE and WP:NOTLINK. Please read them. Bye, Alex2006 (talk) 02:25, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

June 2015

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. While objective prose about beliefs, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. SmartSE (talk) 09:39, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

You have been blocked temporarily from editing for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text below this notice: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  SmartSE (talk) 15:03, 15 June 2015 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

Hi SmartSe, Sorry about my mistake, I understood in the correction before you blocked me that the problem was in the link sources, so I removed it and upload again the information. Really I want to include this information on this person profile, because I think is useful, but in any case I don't want to violate the Wikipedia rules, so if you can tell me what is the problem I will try to resolve it, if you can't help me with that, I will try to review it again and do my best to meet the standards. Sorry again for this mistake. Regards

Decline reason:

Your unblock request is apparently based on the belief that the block was for one little bit of your editing, which you refer to as "the link sources". However, as explained below, every single edit you made was clearly part of an attempt to promote the reputation of one person. If you can understand that doing that is unacceptable, you may make a new unblock request. However, for that to have any significant chance of succeeding, you will have to make it clear that you understand that editing in the promotional way you have done is unacceptable, and that you will not do so again. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 19:47, 15 June 2015 (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.

All of your edits have been to promote Lola Karimova-Tillyaeva and that would appear to be your only reason to be here which is why I blocked you. While it's not forbidden for editors with a conflict of interest to edit articles, it is extremely promotional to continue to add a section on philanthropy like this which is clearly public relations rather than neutral encyclopedic content. If you understand the problem, then I can unblock you. SmartSE (talk) 16:53, 15 June 2015 (UTC)

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

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

---

Request reason:

In the review before the last I Understood that I cant include promotional content, for me now it is totaly clear, so I accept my mistake and I confirm you that I am going to follow the guidelines. On the last review I think I understand that I can't include content for this profile anymore, that is correct? thanks in advance

Accept reason:

I don't think @Smartse: should have been edit warring with you on Lola Karimova-Tillyaeva (as he could be accused of having a conflict of interest) and should not have used incivil language such as "crap sources, stinks of PR" as this tends to inflame a dispute rather than calm things down. I am unblocking you on the strict condition that you promise not to edit that article again or write anything more to do with Lole Karimova-Tillyaeva in any other articles. If I see you editing in this topic area again, I will recommend you are reblocked. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 09:58, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Sockpuppet investigation

Hi. An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Barkfox, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

SmartSE (talk) 21:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)