User talk:Soldertools1

Welcome!

Hello, Soldertools1, and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions, such as your edit to the page Printed circuit board, 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
Tutorial
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! Constant314 (talk) 14:19, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Spamming links to your own articles

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 14:45, 8 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Soldering. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include, but are not limited to, links to personal websites, links to websites with which you are affiliated (whether as a link in article text, or a citation in an article), and links that attract visitors to a website or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the page, please discuss it on the associated talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Just plain Bill (talk) 13:58, 5 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

May 2018

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to Ball Grid Array. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. --Janke | Talk 18:49, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

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 ~~~~}}. clpo13_(talk) 23:13, 8 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #21470 was submitted on May 09, 2018 09:39:55. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 09:39, 9 May 2018 (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).

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello Moderator! I want to share one thing that I am here to unblock my account. As I have shared some informative article or citations for the electronics category pages. However, I have no intention of promoting any business. I can share whatever I found information on the internet as far as electronics topics of IPC Training are concerned. I love to read articles and blogs for electronics o Wikipedia as well. Also, I will take care of it not to post too many links in future and also try not to edit such links as well. Therefore I request you to plz unblock my account or IP whatever you have banned so that I can share required and informative citations that can be more help others also.

Decline reason:

Your contributions so far have been inappropriate, and it's not clear from this request if you understand why. Until we are sure you won't make the same mistakes again, we can't unblock you. So, please explain exactly how your existing edits were inappropriate and let us know exactly how you'll ensure you don't make the same mistake again. Yamla (talk) 10:48, 9 May 2018 (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).

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

@Yamla, As I discussed earlier that in my previous posts, I make edits to the content whatever I found on the internet. I have no intention of promoting any business or website. I just want to share information with others. I can ensure that from next time you will get no complaints from my side regarding such things. And, I do not have any other specific reason for posting the previous links that you found inappropriate. Just give me a chance to prove myself.

Decline reason:

In reviewing your edits, I must concur with Yamla and the blocking admin. Until you can state what was problematic about your edits, and tell us what steps you will take to prevent it from happening, we cannot unblock you. As such, I am declining this request. 331dot (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2018 (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 don't know what you want to listen from me. I have already told you all the reasons. I started editing on Wikipedia from January and being a newcomer, I have no idea that the links I am sharing are promoting somebody's business. All I want is to share some useful content. I am feeling sorry for all this inconvenience. If you unblock me, then for future edits I will take care of such things. I will try not to share any link with intention of any business promotion. You can also check my previous shared links, according to me all have informative content for electronics geeks. My motive is to share the content that can also be helpful to others. I left with no more reasons. I hope you will get your answer or reason and unblock me soon. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soldertools1 (talk • contribs)

Let's cut to the chase. Do you explicitly agree to not post any links associated with Bob Wettermann? Every single link you've posted thus far was an article written by that individual. See also our conflict-of-interest policy, if you haven't already read it. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:32, 10 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

{unblock| Yes, I do agree with you that most of the links I shared are related to BOB Wettermann. But, for every single

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).

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Yes, I do agree with you that most of the links I shared are related to BOB Wettermann. But, for every single keyword that I searched on Google only his blogs, I found relevant to the topic or citations. I have no personal relation with BOB and his Business. But, you can also check the relevancy of the topics I have shared. Each article shares the most informative content and nowhere else I found such informative blogs. Even at IPC main website(http://www.ipc.org), they have much informative content but more complex to understand. I am not here only for BOB, but whenever I found some useful content from any other person or blogger then I"ll definitely share it through citations or external links. I again request you to unblock me and give me one more chance to prove myself.

Decline reason:

As you are not asking for an unblock right now (see discussion below), I am declining this request. When you have had sufficient time to read enough of those policy pages to have a basic understanding of the use and purpose of citations, of reliable sources, and of how Wikipedia uses external links (we don't need you to understand all the details - I doubt anyone here knows them all), please make a new unblock request - but not until then. In that unblock request, please give a brief summary of these important policies in your own words. Also, please be sure to restate your commitment below to not add links to Bob Wetterman's websites or articles. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2018 (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.

A few things. Firstly, blogs are not considered reliable sources as per WP:RS and should not be used as Wikipedia citations (there are some exceptions, but it's simpler if you just start from the basis that blogs should not be used). Next, what is a Wikipedia inline citation for? It's to provide a reliable source which verifies that the preceding sentence or paragraph is correct, and is not just a link to more information about the same subject - see WP:Verifiability to learn about the requirement for verifiability and WP:Citing sources to learn how to do it. Finally, Wikipedia articles are not supposed to be turned into long lists of external links, and we need to be sparing and careful in their use - see WP:External links for more information on how to use external links. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:35, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You continue to try to make excuses for the promotional links that you added to the article. That does not help your case. The links have been determined to be SPAM/promotional and should not have been added to the articles. You need to acknowledge that those links violated the guidelines. I’ll accept your word that you did not knowingly violate the guidelines. That means you don’t understand the guidelines. You need to show that you have read and understand the guidelines.Constant314 (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Soldertools1; so you're not explicitly agreeing to stop posting links affiliated with Bob Wettermann? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 16:23, 11 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

If you want me to stop sharing articles affiliated with Bob Wetterman, then I agree to stop sharing his links. But, just like I already said that you all have to give a single chance to prove myself and I can guarantee you that I will never violate your guidelines again. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soldertools1 (talk • contribs)

Subsequent comments by you do not need to be formatted as an unblock request, only one can be open at a time. Wikipedia has many guidelines, I'm not even aware of every single one, are you sure you want to commit to never violating one again ever? What we want is for you to understand what is being told to you on this page, that you understand what you did wrong in this instance. Your response suggests to me that you don't yet understand what was wrong about what you did(even if it was unintentional). Please explain what was wrong about your actions in your own words. 331dot (talk) 07:41, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot; I want to assure you one thing very clear that yes mostly my shared are related to Bob Wettermann but I have no direct or indirect relation to him. However, it happens due to my profession in which I take help from various websites for PCB repair and other IPC Certification Courses on which I am doing my project. In this, I mostly liked his blogs and information on site as well. That's why may I have shared some of them. I apologize for this mistake as it happens because I have not read Wikipedia's guidelines thoroughly. For Next time, I assure you will not face any such mistake from my side. Hope you understand my point and take necessary action in my favor. Thanks in advance Soldertools1 (talk) 10:05, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Soldertools1, did you read my comments above about citations, reliable sources and external links? Have you followed the links I gave you and read the relevant policy pages? Do you have any response? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:39, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Boing! Yes, I have gone through Verifiability and Citing_sources that you have shared me. But you know, the pages you have shared me have too much content to read so it will take a little more time to study the complete terms of all four pages. But, I will do it for sure and also eager to know other necessary guidelines of Wikipedia.Soldertools1 (talk) 11:24, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, all of that and you still have not explicitly agreed to stop adding pages related to Bob Wetterman? Is there any point to continuing here? I'll try to simplifyy it:

Yes or no question: If unblocked, do you agree to not add links to Bob Wetterman's websites or articles?, and understand that resumption of such activity will result in an immediate re-block? OhNoitsJamie ^Talk 15:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Soldertools1, before I would agree to an unblock I would want to be confident that you understand the purpose of citations, understand what makes a reliable source, and understand how Wikipedia uses external links. It might take you a little while, but I only want to see an understanding of the basics (and not in-depth knowledge of the whole policies). Unless you understand these basics, you really should not be editing articles, so I see no pressing need for an unblock until you do. (Oh, and it should go without saying, but I would also want to see an unequivocal answer to Ohnoitsjamie's question.) Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 15:58, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@OhNoitsJamie, Without saying much now, I strongly agree to not add links to Bob Wetterman's websites or articles? and @Boing!, I am not saying that you unblock me right now but I am just requesting you to unblock me once you become confident to me. Also, I assure you that you will never get chance to block me again for such silly mistakes.Soldertools1 (talk) 06:51, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

See my decline reason in your unblock request, above. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:33, 14 May 2018 (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).

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello Moderator and @Boing! said Zebedee I have read the Wikipedia's major guidelines which @boing have shared with me(Identifying reliable sources, Verifiability, Citing_sources, External Links). Now I really understood What to edit and How to edit on Wikipedia. Whenever I will share anything in future, firstly I will check whether the source is reliable or not. I am requesting you again to unblock me, and if you don't want me to unblock right now then please, set the minimum expiration date for this block. I hope, you will do something good in my favor. Thanks again in advance.

Decline reason:

No. You violated WP:SOCK while waiting for this review. Probably the only path forward is WP:SO. Yamla (talk) 12:29, 30 June 2018 (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.

Hello to all Moderators and Admins, I am still waiting for your response to my last Unblock request. Now I completely understood the objectives to place citations or external links. So, once again request to you all that please review my unblock request and please do something in my favor.Soldertools1 (talk) 07:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

When I declined your previous unblock request, I suggested "In that unblock request, please give a brief summary of these important policies in your own words." You have not done that. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 08:26, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Boing! said Zebedee, as you said I have gone through all the important thing that you have shared with me and in my Last unblock request I have mentioned those things. Believe me, I have read and understood them all. But, to be true this time I am not able to understand what type of brief summary you want from me, What should I mention in that unblock request? I request you to please ellaborate it clearly, so that I can make a proper unblock request as you want.

Well, I wanted you to explain the relevant policies, not just mention them and say you understand them, because very often people who say they understand our policies really don't. Here are some specific questions which I would like to see you answer in your own words (answering below would be fine)...

What is the purpose of an inline citation?
How would you identify a reliable source?
What is the purpose of an external link in an article's "External links" section?
Give examples of some kinds of sources that are not suitable for use in a Wikipedia article.

Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 13:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Soldertools1;I think that it would be helpful if you took three or four of the links that you posted, that were reverted as SPAM, and find a clause in the guidelines for each link that disqualifies that link. Constant314 (talk) 21:43, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Boing! said Zebedee I hope my all answers(listed below) to your questions make you satisfied and make me trustful.

  :#What is the purpose of an inline citation?

- The purpose of Inline Citation is to permits the reader to identify which source supports the material, right there in the line of text.

  :#How would you identify a reliable source?

- To identify whether a source is reliable or not, I will ensure that article or any other informative Material should come from Established Institutions or any scholarly community. Also, the material that has been published in reputable peer-reviewed sources or by well-regarded academic press is considered as reliable.

  :#What is the purpose of an external link in an article's "External links" section?

- External links are used to link to other acceptable domains outside of Wikipedia. Those links must include further research that is accurate and on-topic, information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail, or other meaningful relevant content.

  :#Give examples of some kinds of sources that are not suitable for use in a Wikipedia article.

Questionable sources.
Self-published sources.
User-generated content or Promotional Content. Soldertools1 (talk) 05:45, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

  : Hello to all Moderators and Admins again, I am still waiting for your good response. I have answered questions of @Boing! said Zebedee. So, I request you all to please check them and send me some positive response. Soldertools1 (talk) 07:14, 26 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I request you all to give some response to my last unblock request and the answers i have given to Boing! said Zebedee questions.Soldertools1 (talk) 11:42, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bear in mind that if you are unblocked, if I see you add any further Bob Wetterman-related articles I will reblock you immediately and initiate a blacklisting of those sites. OhNoitsJamie ^Talk

Shortly before you posted this unblock request, you created Radcliffkaty1. Why would you do that while you are blocked?
— Berean Hunter (talk) 23:41, 30 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@OhNoitsJamie Thanks for replying. Jamie, I ensure you again that I will never post any links related to Bob Wettermann nor one who looks promotional in any sense. And @ Berean Hunter I created that account to check my unblock status because I have no idea how to check unblock status that time. Then I read Wikipedia guidelines, policies etc and came to know about the rules. That's the only reason to create an account. Here, I again assure you that I will take care of such silly mistakes not to repeat in future. Apart from this, OhNoitsJamie thanks for your positive reply in my favor. Soldertools1 (talk) 05:12, 31 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hello all admins, I know I am not the only one who is facing such issues like - blocked IP's and therefore I know you have to manage others also. But I am waiting for some response from your side. Hope, you will send some positive response as soon as possible. Soldertools1 (talk) 05:55, 6 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

June 2018

Hello admins, I am still waiting for your response to my last unblock request. So, plz respond in my favor (if possible ) to my last unblock request. I shall be highly thankful to you. I assure you I will not post anymore Bob or other promotional links on Wikipedia. Soldertools1 (talk) 06:20, 18 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

July 2018

Hello! I am expecting some response from Wikipedia admins since long. So, please make some reply to my last unblock request and I am still waiting for your favorable reply. It's my humble request to all of you there. Soldertools1 (talk) 13:31, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You were given a reply above. 331dot (talk) 13:57, 2 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot, I ensured you all by providing the answers for @Boing! said Zebedee questions. But still, I am blocked and not even an expiry has been set for this block. I request you to atleast set an expiry date for this ban. I also read thoroughly Wikipedia's guidelines completely and now understand the main purpose of quotes, external links, etc. So plz make some favorable reply to my request! Soldertools1 (talk) 04:53, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

As the last reviewing administrator stated, you violated WP:SOCK while waiting for your block to be reviewed. That is unacceptable and demonstrates that you actually do not understand Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Merely stating that you understand is not sufficient, you must demonstrate that you understand. As you were told, at this point your only pathway back is the standard offer; no edits or socking of any kind for at least six months. I would strongly suggest that you abide by that. 331dot (talk) 09:44, 3 July 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@331dot I strongly agree that while I was blocked I created another account. But I also told you(admins) that I was only just checking whether my account resumed from the block state or not. Also, I was not familiar with the guidelines at that time. But, if you felt something wrong from my side then I feel sorry for that. According to you, my account has the chance to get unblocked after 6 months(since, the ban). So, ok, from now I will wait for the completion of the review period. I hope after that, I will get some favorable response from your side.

December 2018

Hello to admins!!! Hope you all are good. I think my 6 months of blocking time is over. So I request you to please reconsider me for the unban of my IP and ID both. I have read all the important guidelines that you have shared with me. So, please accept my request for unblock and do some positive action in my favor. I will be very thankful to you. Soldertools1 (talk) 04:59, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

You need to actually make another unblock request for it to be considered. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 19 December 2018 (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).

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Hello to admins!!! Hope you all are good. I am requesting this unblock request again. As discussed earlier, my 6 months of reviewing period are over and also, I have read and understood all the important guidelines. Also, I assure you that I will never repeat the mistake which I have done till now. I apologize for my mistakes and looking for a positive response from your side. Trust me, from next time you"ll never get a chance to block my account or IP from such an old silly mistakes.

Decline reason:

I'm sorry, but I cannot unblock you at this time. Quickly skimming this page, I see a number of issues you must specifically address. As such, this request is too vague. There are a number of knowledge questions on this page you must answer correctly before we can feel comfortable that problems will not repeat themselves. -- Dlohcierekim (talk) 15:51, 27 December 2018 (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 blocked user is asking that their block be reviewed on the Unblock Ticket Request System:

Soldertools1 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

UTRS appeal #23645 was submitted on Dec 24, 2018 10:06:59. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 10:06, 24 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]