User talk:Larsenjewellery1

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. Alexf^(talk) 02:52, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Larsen Jewellery (November 11)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reasons left by Dan arndt were:

This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article. In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are:

in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
reliable
secondary
strictly independent of the subject

Make sure you add references that meet all four of these criteria before resubmitting. Learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit after they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Larsen Jewellery and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you do not edit your draft in the next 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
If you need any assistance, or have experienced any untoward behavior associated with this submission, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

Dan arndt (talk) 08:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Larsenjewellery1! Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! Dan arndt (talk) 08:43, 11 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dan, I appreciate it. Right now I need to get this account unblocked (changing the username) but then I was hoping I could message with you or the AfC helpdesk about what specifically you felt like made the article read like an advertisement. I really aimed to keep it neutral and factual and follow the guidelines to the best of my ability while making sure the conflict was declared, so I'm not sure where that goes wrong. Larsenjewellery1 (talk) 03:10, 18 November 2022 (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.

Larsenjewellery1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

Larslarsen2022 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

name and current year for the username. The disclosure of my affiliation with the article I submitted through the AfC process has been there since the start on this user page (which hopefully was correctly attributed, if it wasn't I apologise, I'm still learning how to use the Wikipedia code.) I've gone in to the AfC draft and the reason for it's dismissal was G11, unambiguous advertising. I can't honestly say I'm sure why, but if this account's username is changed and I'm allowed to interact with other users again, I'll definitely go to the Teahouse etc. and ask how if I were to re-submit what would need to be updated in the draft via the AFC process for it not to be seen as such. I created that draft AfC with all the best intentions - sourcing everything outside of our website, not citing anything that was "inside knowledge" in the company, and being as neutral and factual as possible, so it would definitely be helpful to understand where it went off track, because I think it meets notability requirements. Though it may not, but I'd like that feedback directly from an experienced Wiki editor. In the meantime, as that learning and discussion take place, I'll be looking at other diamond, jewllery and gemstone related content to bring it up to date and be more accurate. Obviously at the moment I'm not able to go in and make any amends to pages because I'm blocked, otherwise, that's what I'd be doing right now as a gesture of good faith.

Decline reason:

We discourage people from using their real names as usernames for security reasons, but you may if you wish. You seem to have a common misunderstanding of Wikipedia; it is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves and what they do- that is considered promotional here, you donn't have to be soliciting or selling something. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion; mere existence does not merit an article. An article about a business must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the business, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business. Please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. You won't be unblocked to, in the short term, edit about your business. If that is your only goal here, this is the end of the road. If you want to be a general contributor and edit about topics unrelated to your business, please tell what those might be. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 09:26, 18 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]