User talk:Cherikoff

Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Sodium benzoate. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 10:49, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Please stop adding advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Roselle (plant). It is considered spamming, and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising. Thanks. Nunquam Dormio (talk) 10:51, 10 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

March 2009

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing in accordance with Wikipedia's blocking policy 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. Mfield (talk) 23:52, 6 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cherikoff (talk) 04:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)There is a fine line between providing visitors with accurate and correct information and what might be seen as spamming.Cherikoff (talk) 04:46, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

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

Request reason:

As an acknowledged pioneer of the Australian wild food industry and someone nominated for Australian of the Year Award 2007 for my work on wild foods I was contributing information that is valuable to anyone using Wikipedia for background to the industry. I will make every endeavour to ensure that future comments are not likely to be seen as spam

Accept reason:

I am accepting your unblock request, on the basis of the assurances you have given. I trust you will be careful about making sure that your potential conflict of interest does not stand in the way of impartial editing. If in doubt about editing, please feel free to ask. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:15, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yes--and you leaped over that line with both feet by adding your cookbooks as references. Editing areas connected to yourself, such as your own article, is called a conflict of interest, and we encourage all editors to avoid it. What edits would you make if we unblocked you? Origamite^{is out right now} 04:18, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

An unblock could be possible in this case, however, I'd prefer if you were more specific. Could you agree not to add links to cherikoff.net? Also to stop adding citations your cookbooks? Also, not to link to products you're selling? Also to stop adding mentions of yourself to articles? PhilKnight (talk) 12:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I understand and agree not to direct links to any of my own pages, products or activities. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cherikoff (talk • contribs)

Thanks for you reply. Here are a few key questions:

Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a business directory?
Do you understand conflict of interest?
Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

PhilKnight (talk) 14:53, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Phil. Yes I agree and understand your requirements and will not direct links to any of my own pages. Regards, Vic Cherikoff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.253.120.226 (talk) 21:23, 24 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There's more to it than simply refraining from adding links to any of your pages. Following the guideline Wikipedia:Conflict of interest also means that you

refrain from citing your own work (even if not linked), and also
refrain from directly editing articles on subjects with which you are associated, except to make minor corrections of typographical errors or to revert obvious vandalism.

For an article with which you may have a conflict of interest, you should propose changes on the article's talk page. It is not clear from your responses that you understand this point. ~Amatulić (talk) 15:06, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Come on. He has been blocked for so long. He has matured. Let him be unblocked. 89.242.64.73 (talk) 20:59, 27 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sinebot. I have read the guidelines and agree to them. I visited a few sites recently to which I could have contributed as an expert to correct some errors of fact on topics with which I was not associated. This prompted me to appeal the block on editing. I appreciate the guidance that I can also propose changes on an article's talk page should it become necessary. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.253.120.226 (talk) 02:38, 28 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, a successful unblock request after five and a half years is pretty rare! The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 16:17, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks James. I appreciate your attention in this and will honor my obligations. Kindest regards, Vic Cherikoff — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.253.120.226 (talk) 23:05, 29 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]