User talk:Calvinopus

Welcome!

Hello, Calvinopus, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Gaslighter (album), seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising. For more information on this, please see:

If you still have questions, there is a new contributors' help page, or you can click here to ask a question on your talk page. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
How to edit a page and how to develop articles
Help pages
Tutorials
Article wizard for creating new articles
Simplified Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! APK whisper in my ear 19:28, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

Hello, I'm Nathan2055. I noticed that you added or changed content in an article, Gaslighter (album), but you didn't provide a reliable source. It's been removed and archived in the page history for now, but if you'd like to include a citation and re-add it, please do so. You can have a look at the tutorial on citing sources. If you think I made a mistake, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 22:00, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm Nathan2055. I wanted to let you know that one or more external links you added to Gaslighter (album) have been removed because they seemed to be inappropriate for an encyclopedia. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page, or take a look at our guidelines about links. Thank you. Nathan2055^{talk - contribs} 22:00, 2 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SpoiledCabbage

This site does not look reliable. There is no information on the site about editorial oversight or methodology (WP:QUESTIONABLE), and, judging from its entry on Taylor Swift's Folklore, for example, it cites unreliable review sources like SimplyLizLemonade (self-published non-expert source) and Daily Mail (notoriously unreliable). If you would like to try having this site evaluated for inclusion as a reliable source on Wikipedia, please open a discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums and refrain from using it further until it is deemed reliable by consensus. isento (talk) 19:03, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

August 2020

This is your only warning; if you insert a spam link to Wikipedia again, you may be blocked from editing without further notice. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted, preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well as potentially being penalized by search engines. Praxidicae (talk) 20:40, 5 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for adding spam links. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia and potentially penalized by search engines.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Ad Orientem (talk) 22:30, 20 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Thank you for considering my appeal. I am the owner of a website I have been working on for more than 2 years. We went live a couple of months ago. The website is SpoiledCabbage.com. We are an aggregation site for music albums, similar to Metacritic. However, SpoiledCabbage.com is much more thorough and detailed than any other aggregation site anywhere. For example, Metacritic gave Da Baby’s “Blame It on Baby” a score of 61 on only 8 reviews. SpoiledCabbage.com gave the same album a 58% positive rating based on 50 reviews. You can choose almost any album that both Metacritic and SpoiledCabbage.com have aggregated and you will find SpoiledCabbage.com will have aggregated many more reviews than Metacritic, sometimes 10 times more. I only offer the above to show you how thorough and reliable SpoiledCabbage.com is and to show it is a benefit to Wikipedia users who research music albums. So, to being blocked by Wikipedia. I do not understand the problem. I simply inserted the very same information for SpoiledCabbage.com that Metacritic has. If you check what I inserted, you will see that, in fact, the scores I inserted are arguably more meaningful and beneficial to your readers than Metacritic’s scores because SpoiledCabbage.com has aggregated so many more albums than Metacritic. I would also like to respectfully point out that there are a multitude of Wikipedia pages dedicated to movies that have the exact kind of scores by the Movie/TV aggregation website, Rotten Tomatoes. So, I appeal the banning based on “Spam” content because SpoiledCabbage.com is providing your reader with exactly the same kind of information, in the exact same way as Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes. I encourage you to check out SpoiledCabbage.com for yourself and I assure you, you will find a professional, thorough, and reliable music album aggregation site. I also welcome a call or Zoom with you to further discuss this appeal. I absolutely love Wikipedia and use it every day for something or another. My heart sank when I was notified that I was blocked. I have worked so hard and long to make SpoiledCabbage.com the best website it can be. I welcome any suggestions you have. I want to thank you for your consideration, and I look forward to clearing this up. Calvinopus (talk) 8:35 pm, Today (UTC−4)

Decline reason:

Decline per Yamla below. We're not going to unblock you to allow you to link to your website. If unblocked, what would you edit that is not an area of conflict of interest for you? only (talk) 01:10, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Please see WP:COI, WP:PROMO, and WP:PAID. It is inappropriate for you to add links to your site. --Yamla (talk) 00:59, 8 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]