User talk:Emcarlsondc

October 2017[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. This is a message letting you know that one or more of your recent edits to Das Sacher has been undone by an automated computer program called ClueBot NG.

ClueBot NG makes very few mistakes, but it does happen. If you believe the change you made was constructive, please read about it, report it here, remove this message from your talk page, and then make the edit again.
For help, take a look at the introduction.
The following is the log entry regarding this message: Das Sacher was changed by Emcarlsondc (u) (t) ANN scored at 0.859492 on 2017-10-07T22:31:00+00:00 .

Thank you. ClueBot NG (talk) 22:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Note/Warning[edit]

Wikipedia is not a directory. Usually accounts like this one and Lizschwartzer will be blocked right away for blatant conflict of interest (Carbonfund.org) and being promotional only; however, other edits from these two accounts have contributed to other areas in good faith, so I will leave it as it is now. It doesn't matter if your intention is to "include facts", if there are no reliable sources to indicate the notability of these organizations, it will not be kept. Having other "similar" camp pages is not a reason; there are plenty of pages on Wikipedia that fails the notability guideline and eventually will be spotted by the patrollers and deleted. Please kindly wait until the organization is notable enough for an uninvolved user to write about them. Thank you. Alex Shih ^Talk 05:39, 21 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

October 2017[edit]

Sorry, I will have to block this account indefinitely along with Lizschwartzer as you are being persistent to disregard what Wikipedia is not despite of having received explanations from several editors. I have also tagged Carbonfund.org for conflict of interest, as your comments have brought this page to my attention that there are several users (including Lizschwartzer) from the revision history that are possibly violations of undisclosed paid contributions, so the page will have to be checked. To request any of the accounts to be unblocked, please follow the instructions at the Wikipedia:Guide to appealing blocks. Alex Shih ^Talk 06:18, 21 October 2017 (UTC) [reply]

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

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

UTRS appeal #19563 was submitted on Oct 21, 2017 16:22:33. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 16:22, 21 October 2017 (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).

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

Request reason:

I maintain this is a huge misunderstanding, and would appreciate a further review. This all started because a Google search of "New Hampshire Summer Camps" brings up a banner of 13 NH summer camps with Wikipedia pages at the top of page one with logos and all. It specifically mentions Wikipedia. PLEASE GOOGLE "New Hampshire Summer Camps" and see the Wikipedia banner for yourself. Based on this, we decided we needed a Wikipedia page like other NH summer camps. When we created one using the same format as other NH summer camps, we were deleted again and again, and then blocked. We repeatedly asked admins RickinBaltimore and Alex Shih to understand we were simply trying to do what others had done, not promote ourselves. This is not simply a matter of 'we will get to those camps'. Google is drawing from the Wikipedia category "New Hampshire Summer Camps" and placing them top on the Google search. Blocking us is like allowing entries for McDonalds, Arbys and Subway but not Burger King. PLEASE GOOGLE "New Hampshire Summer Camps" and see. All of the responses so far have not recognized that Wikipedia is being promotional in the Google search (not organic) and it is this that prompted our action. If Wikipedia is going to be used for direct promotional purposes by or with Google, then fair entry is necessary. I simply ask you to Google "New Hampshire Summer Camps" and look at the top and see what we are talking about and I believe we can clear this up. Please be fair.

Decline reason:

You have yet to show an understanding of WP:COI, WP:PAID, and WP:PROMO. Your arguments here are completely irrelevant. You'll also want to read WP:OTHERSTUFF and WP:YELLOWPAGES. Yamla (talk) 12:00, 22 October 2017 (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:

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

UTRS appeal #19571 was submitted on Oct 22, 2017 07:22:05. This review is now closed.

--UTRSBot (talk) 07:22, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock[edit]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

I will not attempt to add pages to Wikipedia if unblocked, including Camp Quinebarge. Emcarlsondc (talk) 18:19, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

This, together with your statement below, is entirely acceptable. Given that the blocking admin has already given their approval below, I am lifting the block. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:53, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Then what will you do on Wikipedia if unblocked? Huon (talk) 18:20, 22 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I will continue to edit pages of which I have no COI, mainly related to my area of expertise, which is climate change, renewable energy, and sustainability. Nor will I touch the Carbonfund.org Foundation page. Note: I am the president of Carbonfund.org Foundation. (Note: until a few days ago I had no idea individuals could not add to their own pages, which is what caused much of this consternation)

I support unblock of both accounts as long as they don't edit articles in which they have clear conflict of interest, and use {{request edit}} instead (this was explained in my initial comment; other contributions looks good and appears to be in good faith). Alex Shih ^Talk 03:02, 23 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]