User talk:Devydevdev09

January 2023[edit]

Hello Devydevdev09. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Draft:Devin J. Ricks, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially serious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat search-engine optimization.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Devydevdev09. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Devydevdev09|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. Sam Kuru (talk) 12:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sam Kuru. The nature of my edits are done in free of service. The impression you're implying is invalid. Apparently the attempts made from you previously and one from an account being suspended in the earlier processes were not successful. I'm personally making the necessary changes to the Draft:Devin J. Ricks so it will be successful in getting approved and not denied like it has been done previously before. No compensation has been received from my edits nor will be done in the future. Thank you for your concern, but at this juncture, your deletion of edits are not necessary. Have a great day. Devydevdev09 (talk) 13:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing because your account is being used only for advertising or promotion.

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 ~~~~}}. Bbb23 (talk) 14:10, 25 January 2023 (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).

Devydevdev09 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here: Did not know the article contributions were considered advertising or promotion. Could I request for an unblock and will not make the mistake again. Thank you. Devydevdev09 (talk) 14:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Who is "we"? (you wrote "we" in an edit summary). Since you don't understand how your edits were promotional, there are no grounds to remove the block. You don't have to be specifically paid for edits to be a paid editor, please review WP:COI and WP:PAID. I am declining your request. 331dot (talk) 14:29, 25 January 2023 (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).

Devydevdev09 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Request reason:

Your reason here: I'm saying I understand now that it has been brought to my attention (advertising or promotion). I'm a new editor. When I said "we" in the comments, I was speaking of myself solely. That was my mistake. This is a learning experience for myself. I assure the issues won't happen again now that I'm aware of the policies & rules.

Decline reason:

This does not convince me you understand WP:PROMO, doesn't address WP:COI at all, and doesn't tell me what you plan to write about instead, if unblocked. Yamla (talk) 14:45, 25 January 2023 (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.