User talk:Renamed user 1499

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).

Renamed user 1499 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I understand that I advertised; I'd like to talk to JamesBWatson to understand what, if anything, I can do to estabilish notability and encyclopedic merit and repost my article.

Decline reason:

Exercising the right to vanish means that you leave Wikipedia permanently. In addition, the block is correct and you do not convince me that you will stop advertising your business. Sandstein 19:35, 19 January 2011 (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.

I'm confused. You sought right to vanish yesterday, which was carried out, and now you're requesting unblock? Exercising your option to vanish means you are leaving Wikipedia forever - not coming back to the next day to ask for unblock under your generic username (which should have been abandoned). –xeno^talk 15:45, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Xeno, you're right. I didn't realize that vanishing from a blocked IP would block everyone at my IP indefinitely. Furthermore, I'd like to try again to repost, and NOT be a sockpuppet. Renamed user 1499 (talk) 15:51, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I had to change my name to make it anonymous. Renamed user 1499 (talk) 15:53, 19 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to leave this to the unblock process. If this account (and the underlying IP) is unblocked, you can then abandon it and create a new account. But you are right that if you did so before seeking unblocking, it would be considered block evasion/sockpuppetry. –xeno^talk 16:04, 19 January 2011 (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).

Renamed user 1499 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I will stop advertising my business. Regarding my 'right to vanish' claim, PLEASE read the above discussion. Renamed user 1499 (talk) 20:06, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

Decline reason:

I've done as you asked and read the above discussion. I find it ironic that you would ask such a thing as you have clearly charged ahead willy-nilly on Wikipedia without bothering to read any of our policies, and you tried to exercise your right to vanish when you obviously did not read and understand that policy either. Vanishing means you leave, forever, never to return under any identity. We could probably let that slide, ridiculous though it is, but now you are asking to be allowed back on to edit on a subject where you have a clear conflict of interest. Please read that and actually pay attention to what it says. We are all of us expected not to write about subjects we have a close connection to. It seems like what you are really saying is that despite your pleas here and elsewhere you never actually intended to vanish and were always planning to come back and try this again. Beeblebrox (talk) 20:38, 20 January 2011 (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.

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).

Renamed user 1499 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

I never said that I plan to reedit the subject that initially got me in trouble. To the contrary, I said "I will stop advertising my business." Perversely, as a result of this hassle I've become familiar with Wikipedia's rules very quickly, especially conflict of interest which I fully accept. In addition, I also said that before I erroneously invoked right to vanish I was unaware that I'd be perpetually blocked as a result of that invocation. Instead of lecturing and obstructing me, understand what I mean above. My 'right to vanish' was a mistake. Quoting right to vanish: It is a generally accepted standard that editors should attempt to follow, though it is best treated with common sense, and occasional exceptions may apply. I speak 3 languages and would like to participate in finance and translation-related sections. Renamed user 1499 (talk) 01:38, 21 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

OK. I've softened the block so that you can create a new account for yourself. Looks like you know to keep your business interests distinct your from Wikipedia interests now. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 05:28, 21 January 2011 (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.