User talk:M22004

May 2020[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. Additionally, if you receive, or expect to receive, compensation for your contributions to Wikipedia, you must disclose who is paying you to edit.

If you intend to make useful contributions other than promoting 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. To do so, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, replace the text "Your reason here" with your reason for thinking that the block was an error, and publish the page. ST47 (talk) 22:33, 23 May 2020 (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.

M22004 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

Requested username:

M22004 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I have been informed that my account has been used for advertising or promotion, and the username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site. I do not represent a business, org, group or website; only myself. Further, I am not compensated by any business or group to make edits on wikipedia. It seems my attempt to follow guidance re using External links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links has been mis-categorized as advertising or promoting a website (which is the official website associated with this topic according to numerous press reports) I included on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Maura_Murray. I believe the update/edits on the launch of the new official website by the Murray family to be in keeping with rules/regulations of Wikipedia. I address this issue in my follow on appeal. The user responsible for blocking my account, ST47, states on their own page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ST47 - You have been indefinitely blocked from editing because your account is being used only for spam or advertising and your username is a violation of the username policy. I have addressed the username violation after reading the username policy and regret this avoidable mistake from the onset. My new username, M22004 is available and follows the username policy. I address ST47s error in categorizing my activity as spam in my appeal request below. Future contributions I intend to make will be in keeping with the guidance of wikipedia and for the purpose of providing accurate information where it may be lacking with respect to people, places, and events. Thank you for considering my request to be unblocked.

Accept reason:

I have renamed your account and I will take ST47's lack of comment as a lack of objection to removing the block. 331dot (talk) 17:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe my attempt to follow guidance re using External links https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:External_links has been mis-categorized as advertising or promoting a website (which is the official website associated with this topic according to numerous press reports) I included on https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disappearance_of_Maura_Murray. Based on the external links guidance, the update/edits on the launch of the new official website by the Murray family does not constitute spam or advertising. While I recognize my initial username may have suggested I am an org, I am not and have requested the use of a new username to avoid future confusion. It’s likely hyperlinking to the official site associated with Maura’s disappearance is what triggered my account being blocked. I am interested to know what wikipedia guidance takes precedence; the guidance I followed that allows for linking to official sites vs the advertising guidance I have been accused of violating. I request this be address as it pertains to the edits I have been blocked for making. Further, the user responsible for blocking my account states on their own page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/ST47 - You have been indefinitely blocked from editing because your account is being used only for spam or advertising and your username is a violation of the username policy. Due to creating an account for the first time and then having it immediately blocked has prevented me from using it for anything other than what has been confused with spam or advertising. Finally, I have provided a username that follows username policy in the preceding request. — Preceding unsigned comment added by MauraMurrayMissing (talk • contribs)

You only need one open appeal(which in this case simultaneously requests unblock and a new username), so I have removed the formatting from your above comment. The block was triggered because your username matches the name of the website that you linked to. In addition, you didn't just add a link at the bottom of the article in an External Links section, you created a passage about it in the article- that passage was only based on the website itself, making it a primary source. If you have independent reliable sources that discuss the launch of this website, that's a different story, but you didn't offer such sources. That's why it is considered advertsing. So, to confirm, you are not the creator of the MauraMurrayMissing website or otherwise associated with it? What other topics do you want to edit about? 331dot (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am requesting a new username in my request to be unblocked. I created a passage about the website after learning of the website launch watching the news and cited three different news sources which are "independent reliable sources" discussing the launch of the website which makes it a "different story" as you say. You can see the citations at the end of the passage that was removed here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Disappearance_of_Maura_Murray&diff=prev&oldid=958458267. I also included quotes from her sister from news reports, which is consistent with other passages in that section that quote her father and police. I am not the creator or associate of the website. The news coverage prompted me to visit the wikipedia page where I noticed the latest news was not included, prompting me to make the edits. Any topic that is missing information I can provide interests me.

@331dot and ST47: This has gone stale. Decline? Accept? Clarify? Carry to WP:AN? Cheers, --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 07:57, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm content to defer to ST47 but I would tend to think an accept is okay here. 331dot (talk) 07:59, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Will someone be making a final decision on this?