Jump to content

User talk:Teoalida

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


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. Alexf(talk) 14:09, 2 March 2014 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi there! I am new in editing Wikipedia. I am sorry for adding links to my own website giving impression that I am using this account solo for purpose of promotion. Can I be unblocked? I wanted to make a contribution to Wikipedia readers. I noticed that on this page Build_to_order_(HDB) there is a conflict between people who add a List of BTO projects and people who delete that massive amount of info because it does not belong to Wikipedia. So, I though that the solution is to link to an external website having the List of BTO projects. HDB officially do not provide such list, the only such list available on the web is the one compiled by me: http://teoalida.com/singapore/btolist/. I added this link. I added a second link in Public_housing_in_Singapore, because I also have a detailed article about the evolution of public housing in Singapore. Indeed, I received a warning that I am triggered the tag of possible conflict of interests, asking me if I am sure that I want to do the editing. I was sure that Wikipedia readers will benefit from it, and I am not doing to increase PageRank, traffic or any personal interests. Next day I found my account blocked by Alexf and editings were reverted, reason: SPAM. Excuse me? I own a website including encyclopedic-like content about Housing in Singapore, relevant to the page where I placed the link, so how is this considered SPAM? From the block message, I have read Wikipedia:External_links "But in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked. When in doubt, you may go to the talk page and let another editor decide." Oh, now I understand what happened. I have registered on Wikipedia years ago with same name with the domain name that I currently linked, triggering the tag, and since I do not have many other editings done, you thought that I am using this account solo to promote personal interests and blocked me without any warning and without checking the relevancy of website. I AM SORRY for not reading rules at the right time and for adding links my own website. Next time I will definitely use Talk page and suggest other editors to add it. Can I have my account unblocked? Please tell me how I can contribute to Wikipedia, when I can edit it? Most likely I will stay quiet and don't edit any existing article unless there is a fatal error, and only by using Talk page to ask permission or to report the error.

Decline reason:

I'm sorry you went to all that trouble to write that, because you failed to address the username issue that was the basis for the block. You need to use {{unblock-spamun}}, as indicated above, to request a new username in addition to whatever else you want to say. — Daniel Case (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2014 (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 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.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

If is not possible to reuse blocked usernames, feel free to change it to Teoalida17. BUT the above block message state that I can appeal the block without changing username. It state that I was blocked because appeared to be used for promotional purposes. Yes, I added 2 links to my website, triggering the tag of possible conflict of interests, I am sorry for not reading the rules stating that we should not link websites that we own, because is self-promotion even if I did NOT intended to promote any personal interest by linking my website. You say that username was the basis for the block? What is the issue more exactly? Teoalida is my original and unique nickname. Since childhood my real life friends call me Teoalida. In cyberspace I am known as Teoalida too. I use Teoalida name on every site/forum where I registered, including on Wikipedia since 2010 and had no problems until now when I added the links. I also bought the domain teoalida.com for my personal website in 2011. I want to sign all my personal works as Teoalida (talk) 22:01, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Personally, I think that the policy that an editor can't have a username that associates it with a company, organisation, website, or whatever, is a stupid policy. However, whether you like it or not, that is the policy, and you will not be unblocked unless you offer to change your username to one that is not the name of your website, with or without a number tacked on at the end. The invitation to request an unblock without offering a change of username was specifically stated to apply "If you believe this block was made in error", but there was no error: you clearly have a username which is the name of a website to which you have linked in both of your edits before the block. The reason why the account has only now been blocked, after existing since 2010, is that it is only now that you have started editing. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 13:58, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Oh... now I understand why did you blocked my own name, and this is clearly an ERROR. Having account blocked for conflict of interest would be LEGIT. I guess that Alexf though that I am editing on behalf of a company, group or organization, but actually is just a website which is mine, and Wikipedia:Username_policy does not state anything against making personal websites/blogs with domain name similar with Wikipedia username, or vice-versa (you can check that my Wikipedia account is older than my domain teoalida.com), your policy only discourage writing about themselves or linking our own websites, and recommend us to let other editors to do this (you can assume that many Wikipedia editors have blogs with same name). For your info, since 2011 another editor placed a link to my website in https://ro.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Palatul_Cantacuzino_(Flore%C8%99ti)&oldid=7277803 and I edited the link due of URL change in my website (that was my first edit), haven't got any warning, thus believing that is allowed to link personal websites. I could register myself another account with a different name and do anything including adding links to my website thus avoiding triggering conflict of interests, but I don't like writing in a name that is not mine. I really regret that I started editing by linking my website instead of doing first something constructive such as writing few new articles, then if I was doing the mistake of adding links, maybe I was warned and not blocked believing that my name exists ONLY to promote my website. Your policy state that we can get unblocked if we understand our mistakes and we promise to not do again. Let's be honest, can I contribute to Wikipedia under my name WITHOUT doing anything related to my website? I started feeling being bitten. Your policy also state to not bite new editors, and as you said I am new in editing even if I registered the account 4 years ago. PS: why every day another admin is replying? Can I talk with just one admin, preferably the one who blocked me (Alexf)? Teoalida (talk) 18:18, 12 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

OK, I have checked the username policy, and I find that some time ago the bit about names of web sites was changed, to explicitly limit it to commercial web sites, whereas previously it covered all web sites. As I have already said, I personally don't agree with that part of the policy anyway, and I regard the change as a step in the right direction, so I am very happy to be able to decide that after all there is no problem with your username. I strongly recommend that you avoid any editing that is connected to your web site, especially linking to it, but apart from that I see no reason why you shouldn't carry on editing. I hope that you can now get on with editing, with no more problems. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 09:47, 13 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you JamesBWatson for unblock and for letting me to use my name!

I love architecture, real estate and automobiles. I may write in these fields.

I have registered on Wikipedia in 2010, intending to write an article about this ruined building https://ro.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palatul_Cantacuzino_(Flore%C8%99ti) and include a 3D model "virtual reconstruction" that I designed (I would ran into conflict of interests?). But soon I posted both article and 3D model on my website instead. In 2011 another editor started that article on Wikipedia and added a link to my website for the 3D model (without even announcing me), but I was happy.

Over time I have spent time writing and designing numerous things, as hobby, voluntarily without intention to make profit, and posted them on my own website.

I could do same kind of volunteer work on Wikipedia. I wanted to write about new launched car models, but I haven't rushed and another editor did it. I wanted to write about buildings but I did not found any more notable buildings. I wanted to improve existing articles but most of them are well written already.

In the same time I was afraid to involve into a such big encyclopedia, I was afraid about being a waste of time since anyone can rewrite over me, also I considered that there are numerous editors and one more editor is not necessary. This is why I haven't done many edits. I am so sad that I started contributing by adding 2 links in articles about Singapore because I have an informative website about Housing in Singapore and I was sure that Wikipedia readers may benefits from it but I triggered the tag of possible conflict of interests and, even if I am an individual, independent, not related with Government of Singapore or any company that I wrote about it in my website, I ran into all these unexpected problems just because I used my name for website's domain name :(


OK... I will NEVER post any link to my website in any article page, but please advise 3 things:

- If I find errors in articles or I can improve a stub, should I edit directly or should use Talk page first?

- Can I suggest in Talk page to other editors to add a link to my website? Otherwise, sooner or later other editors may notice interesting articles on my website and may add the links anyway.

- Can I clean up this Talk page in the future, and have also the revision history cleaned, to remove all negative history and all stupid questions that I am asking now?

Teoalida (talk) 02:36, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Teoalida, and Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{Help me}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by using four tildes (~~~~) or by clicking if shown; this will automatically produce your username and the date. Also, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field with your edits. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! User:JamesBWatson (talk) 09:08, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Getting started
Getting help
Policies and guidelines
The community
Writing articles
Miscellaneous
  • I hope you have a successful time here, after your somewhat discouraging start. I am posting (above) a "Welcome" message, which includes links to various policies, guidelines, and other pages that may be helpful in understanding how Wikipedia works. Don't try to read all of them before you do any more editing, because there is far too much there to take in. However, do look at any of the pages which seem relevant to your needs at the moment, and come back to other pages later when other things become relevant.
  • A word of advice. In my experience, new editors who jump straight into writing new articles very often have a frustrating time, as they find that time and time again work they have done is deleted, because in one way or another it does not conform to Wikipedia's guidelines or policies. It is much better to start by making small improvements to existing articles, as that way any mistakes you make will be small ones, and you won't be losing a lot of work. You will gradually learn what is considered acceptable, and after a while you will know enough about how Wikipedia works to be able to write new articles (if you want to) without fear that they will be speedily deleted. That is just my advice, and it is up to you whether to take it, but it is based on what I have seen happen to large numbers of new editors over the course of years.
  • To answer your questions:
  1. You are perfectly free to go straight into editing articles. If you are in doubt, you can post a note about what changes you propose to make on a talk page, and see if anyone responds, but if you are confident you know what you are doing that is not necessary. However, if you find that a change you make is reverted by another editor who disagrees, then either accept that and leave it, or else post your reasons for preferring your version on the talk page, and be willing to discuss the issues. Don't just keep changing back to your preferred version: doing so, known as edit warring, is a pretty good way to get blocked from editing.
  2. You can suggest on a talk page that a link be added to your website. Before doing so, think carefully whether the main purpose of doing so is to help readers know more about the subject of the article, or to attract people to your website, of which you are probably proud. The talk pages of articles about very prominent subjects get lots of activity, and virtually anything you post there will get a response fairly quickly. However, there are millions of less prominent articles where the talk page gets very little traffic, and a message posted there may remain unanswered for a long time. You can attract attention to a message by posting {{helpme}} followed by whatever question you want to ask.
  3. You are perfectly free to remove almost any content from this talk page when it is finished with. There are a few exceptions, the main one being declined unblock requests while the block is still in force, but since your block is no longer in force, there is nothing to stop you from removing the stuff relating to that block now. You can read Wikipedia:User pages#Removal of comments, notices, and warnings if you want to. Probably you will want to just get rid of everything related to the block, but for normal talk page messages you may prefer to put them into an archive, which makes them easier to find if anyone has any reason to want to check old messages in the future. For the vast majority of messages, nobody will ever have any reason to do so, but someone just may want to check some of them some time. If you do decide to archive old talk page messages, you can either just do so manually, copying and pasting each message into an archive page as you remove it from this page, or you can have it automatically archived. Help:Archiving a talk page tells you all you might want to know on the subject, but in my opinion, like many of the pages about how Wikipedia works, there is just too much there, making it rather confusing. Go ahead and read all of it if you like, but I'll tell you how I get my talk page to be automatically archived, and you may or may not like to do the same.

I have the following at the top of my talk page:

{{User:MiszaBot/config
|archiveheader = {{talkarchivenav}}
|maxarchivesize = 200K
|counter = 58
|minthreadsleft = 4
|minthreadstoarchive = 1
|algo = old(7d)
|archive = User talk:JamesBWatson/Archive %(counter)d
}}

This makes an automatic program (a "bot") move sections of my talk page to archive pages if they haven't been edited for 7 days (that's what the old(7d) does). It automatically starts a new archive whenever the latest archive is about to get longer than 200 kBytes, and calls the archives User talk:JamesBWatson/Archive 1, User talk:JamesBWatson/Archive 2, and so on. I also have {{archive box | auto=yes }} on my talk page, which provides a little box with links to each of the archive pages. If you want to use this method, I suggest to begin with setting the time to something much longer than 7 days, perhaps measured in months rather than days, and then reduce the time limit if you start being so heavily involved in Wikipedia discussions that your talk page starts filling up too quickly. There are many very active Wikipedia editors who rarely get talk page messages, and other much less active ones who get tons of messages: it depends what sort of work you do here. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:48, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Two more points about automatic archiving that I didn't think to mention.
  1. The bit that says "counter = 58" is because I am currently up to archive number 58. Assuming you want to start with archive number 1, you would use "counter = 1".
  2. Any section of the talk page which does not end with a signature will not be archived, as it is by checking the last signature that the bot decides whether the section is due for archiving. Not a big problem: every now and then I have I have a section to archive manually. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 08:54, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]
I have just realised that I didn't answer your question about having the revision history of this page "cleaned". I'm afraid user talk page histories are not deleted except under exceptional circumstances, as there is sometimes good reason for wanting to check the history of messages on user talk pages. For example, if you ever post anything that looks as though it may be promoting your web site, it will be relevant for anyone dealing with it to know that you have been warned about doing so, and that you have been unblocked on the basis of your undertaking that you won't do so. I am not suggesting that I think you will do that, but just giving it as an example of the sort of reason why talk page histories are almost always preserved. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 15:35, 14 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of SkyVille@Dawson

[edit]

Hello Teoalida,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged SkyVille@Dawson for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jayakumar RG (talk) 14:09, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of SkyTerrace@Dawson

[edit]

Hello Teoalida,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged SkyTerrace@Dawson for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions. Jayakumar RG (talk) 14:10, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Teoalida&oldid=1046117439"