User talk:Metronomicon

Welcome!

Hello, Metronomicon, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as Metronome (software), may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Alexf^(talk) 13:35, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Metronome (software)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Metronome (software) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about web content, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Alexf^(talk) 13:35, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

September 2013

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. If you intend to edit constructively in other topic areas, you may be granted the right to continue under a change of username. 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, website 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, although if you can demonstrate a pattern of future editing in strict accordance with our neutral point of view policy, you may be granted this right. See Wikipedia's FAQ for 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, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again.

What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you may consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions here about 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, you may appeal this block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Singularity42 (talk) 15:09, 12 September 2013 (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).

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

Request reason:

Honestly I'm not sure what to say, I'm astonished as it is, I didn't intend to do an unsollicited promotion I just attempted to add general information about something I did develope if that infringes NPOV, then I'm guilty. The edits were done without bias I just added and listed the technical specs / goals without any enphasis, if the fact I'm the author of the software infringes NPOV by itself as I said I'm guilty, I don't intend asking for another username because if blocked this will be the last contribution I ever do to wikipedia. Since first: writing the article source which got CSED as fast as light took me a good 3 quarters of a hour after trying to read through your wall of (presumed) "guidelines"; and second: editing the other which earned me a ban which I did right after the first (and that's why I couldn't appeal to the speedy deletion) took me 1 hour and half to complete, and ended me getting seized and blocked. Concluding, maybe you should be a bit less frustrated and harsh when administering wikipedia, because the impression I had is awful and you for sure caused me frustration as well.

Decline reason:

Well, if you don't intend to ask for a new username then please don't waste our time putting your rants in an unblock request. — Daniel Case (talk) 04:08, 14 September 2013 (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.

Metronomicon (talk) 16:41, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"Well," dear Daniel Case if you really define my post a "rant" then maybe I'm the one who wasted his time trying to give a contribution with people like yourself and Mr. Singularity42 roaming around. The good thing is that (yet) again what seems the general attitude of Wikipedia administrators is being shown in "all its glory". Have a nice day (P.S. You could have declined in a polite way but being polite is obviously beyond your capabilities) Metronomicon (talk) 10:55, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It says quite clearly that the unblock template is for requesting unblock. To use it just to drive more attention to your flipped bird as you leave is not only impolite no matter what words you use, it does more to demonstrate your unfitness to be a member of the Wikipedia community than any words of yours did. Daniel Case (talk) 16:15, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry Daniel but while fingers could be your ways of expression they're not mine, and to cite your statement it is also quite clear that what happened to me falls flat in what is considered, or at least I consider, an Abuse. Now since we don't seem to be able, to give wikipedia administrators "their dues" in these occasions and remove "the hammer from their hands" or try to, since not only they aren't representative of the Wikimedia Foundation but there aren't appropriate reporting tools for the task (or if there're they're well hidden..). All I'm left to do is at the very least to leave an appropriate, properly pin-pointed, public testimony of the events. Best regards. Metronomicon (talk) 16:45, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]