User talk:Dekedigital

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


Welcome![edit]

Hello, Dekedigital, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Dekedigital, 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 Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} 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! IdreamofJeanie (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Dekedigital[edit]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Dekedigital, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be blatant advertising which only promotes or publicises a company, product, group or service. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

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 "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 deleted 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, then please contact the deleting administrator. IdreamofJeanie (talk) 17:08, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January 2018[edit]

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth 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 that reason, you must:

  • Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of 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}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. MER-C 17:11, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

Hi guys, I think I screwed up in creating this account. I work for an agency and we've been asked to create a page for one of our client's companies. I created the userpage for Deke Digital just using the About Us copy on our website, but I'm not trying to use this to promote anything. Can I replace this username with one that's personal just to me, as twspri31? This is all new to me so I'm trying to figure it all out. Thx

Decline reason:

This seems to imply that you think it's acceptable for your agency to behave in this manner. It absolutely is not. See WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. Yamla (talk) 20:10, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
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.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

This is not helpful. I am trying to comply and am getting nowhere. Am I or am I not allowed to post a page for my client?

Decline reason:

There are actually three problems we would need to sort out. The first is easy: we cannot have group accounts or pormotionally named accounts. Since you're willing to rename the account and it's just you using it, that should be fine.

The second issue is that by making paid edits without disclosure, you've violated our terms of use. You'll need to address that you've reviewed the policy at WP:PAID and will comply.

The third issue relates to the actual material you've added. That may be more difficult. I've looked at the material, now deleted, and it just looks like unabashed spam. I simply cannot reconcile "I'm not trying to use this to promote anything" with "We’d love to talk with you about your firm’s opportunities and challenges. Drop us a note via the contact form below and we’ll get back to you quickly." Not to mention four paragraphs of simple adcopy. You'll need to address your editing plans and that you understand the distinction between a neutral encyclopedic article and SEO. Frankly, this is probably not the best place to be adding promotional material for a client. Kuru (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Requested username:

Request reason:

@Kuru:

Thank you for your help with this -- much appreciated and I think we can resolve this.

- Yes, I would very much like to change my username to something that's just for me. Didn't realize that we couldn't share an account, but that's no problem. - On making paid edits, I have now reviewed the WP:PAID and will certainly comply. Once my account is unfrozen I'll add the disclosure to my page to reflect who my client is so that will be covered.

- And the description on my page, I misunderstood what needed to be there so I just pasted in the description from our About Us page, which yes is promotional. We aren't going to be adding anything promotional, just descriptive so I'll make that clear once I'm back up.

Accept reason:

Per below: Unblocked with the understanding that new articles should only be created via the Article Wizard and the review process. You should also take a look at WP:BIO, WP:SPAM, WP:COI and WP:PAID to determine whether your client is notable enough to be the subject of a draft in the first place, and some advice on how to write about them, both regarding the draft itself and the behind-the-scenes disclosure. WP:Your first article may also be of use. Huon (talk) 21:33, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've moved your request to the end of the page, which is where people expect to find new messages. I also moved your message inside the box. I hope you don't mind. Anon126 (notify me of responses! / talk / contribs) 06:55, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still skeptical that a specialty content marketing firm is going to be able to write neutral material on behalf of a client. I'm sure it won't be about some marginally-notable "serial entrepreneur" or their pet startup and half the article won't be Crunchbase-inspired babble about about how exciting their series-B funding was, correct? Kuru (talk) 20:15, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Kuru, going by the COI tag on the now-deleted user page, I expect it's going to be about Jen O'Neal, who may or may not be notable. I was thus thinking to unblock and give the editor a second chance, with a reminder to take WP:BIO, WP:SPAM, WP:COI and WP:PAID into account when writing that draft (or, in part, before writing a draft). Would you object? Huon (talk) 22:20, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
That's at least a little above the range I was expecting. I would be open if edits can be contained in draft space until there's a track record. Kuru (talk) 23:25, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dekedigital, would you agree to an unblock under the condition that any attempts to write articles about O'Neal (or other clients) go through the Article Wizard and are submitted for a review by an uninvolved editor? Huon (talk) 04:03, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, absolutely. Appreciate it, thanks Huon.Dekedigital (talk) 04:24, 23 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jen O'Neal (March 27)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by Heliosxeros was:
The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners. Thank you.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
EROS message 14:31, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Teahouse logo
Hello, Dekedigital! Having an article declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing. If you are wondering why your article submission was declined, please post a question at the Articles for creation help desk. If you have any other questions about your editing experience, we'd love to help you at the Teahouse, a friendly space on Wikipedia where experienced editors lend a hand to help new editors like yourself! See you there! EROS message 14:31, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your submission at Articles for creation: Jen O'Neal (May 24)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by TonyBallioni was:
This submission's references do not adequately show the subject's notability. Wikipedia requires significant coverage (not just mere mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject—see the guidelines on the notability of people, the golden rule and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue. Please improve the submission's referencing (see Wikipedia:Referencing for beginners and Help:Introduction to referencing/1), so that the information is verifiable, and there is clear evidence of why the subject is notable and worthy of inclusion in an encyclopedia. If additional reliable sources cannot be found for the subject, then it may not be suitable for Wikipedia at this time.
 The comment the reviewer left was:
The sourcing is either non-independent, non-reliable, or trivial. Focus on in-depth sourcing from independent organizations.
Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.
TonyBallioni (talk) 18:31, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dekedigital&oldid=1046507984"