User talk:CareerUpdate
CareerUpdate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Eagles247 (talk) I understand some of my edits may be viewed as promotional. However, I do not believe such edits should result in me being blocked from contributing to the Wiki Community, without allowing me to correct my actions. Editors are not perfect, and should not have their editing privilege removed for content that may be viewed by some as promotional, when not read in the context of the entire wiki article. Looking at my history as an editor, I have presented both negative and positive content on the subjects of my articles. Yes, some folks may view the positive as promotional while others may view the negative as defamation. However, my expectation is that an adminstrator, steward, or any oversight body within wikipedia, need to provide guidance and correction to editors, and not censor them. So, I am requesting that you and this community reassess your reason for blocking me, while considering the totality of my actions and my intent to adhere to the community rules and willingly heed to corrections CareerUpdate (talk) 19:17, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You need only one unblock request open at a time. See below. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:02, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
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.
Speedy deletion nomination of NFL Player Engagement[edit]
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 NFL Player Engagement, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information.
If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but 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 yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:18, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
July 2012[edit]
Hello, CareerUpdate. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.
All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.
If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:
- Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
- Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
- Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
- Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.
Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.
For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:23, 20 July 2012 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Eagles 24/7 (C) 15:48, 25 July 2012 (UTC)CareerUpdate (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I do not understand why I am being blocked, I am placing best efforts in contributing to the Wiki community as an author. Eagles247 believes otherwise, and without substantiation decides to block me indefinitely without letting me know what exactly the violations are and offering me an opportunity to remedy them.
Decline reason:
Your editing has been unambiguously promotional from the start. You have created a number of articles, all of which have been unambiguous advertising from start to finish; you have made numerous edits to an existing article which, taken together, are promotional in combined effect; you have edited articles to add promotional content about subjects only marginally relevant to the subjects of the articles. If, as you claim, you genuinely cannot see your editing as promotional, then you are so out of touch with reality that you lack the necessary judgement to edit objectively. Furthermore, you have attempted to evade the block by creating and using another account. Abusing multiple accounts is itself a reason for being blocked. JamesBWatson (talk) 08:09, 26 July 2012 (UTC)
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.