User talk:Cvedd-paddick

Speedy deletion nomination of UXP Systems Inc.

Hello Cvedd-paddick,

I wanted to let you know that I just tagged UXP Systems Inc. for deletion, because it seems to be promotional, rather than an encyclopedia article.

If you feel that the article shouldn't be deleted and want more time to work on it, you can contest this deletion, but please don't remove the speedy deletion tag from the top.

You can leave a note on my talk page if you have questions.

TonyBallioni (talk) 14:06, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

August 2017

Welcome to Wikipedia. It might not have been your intention, but you removed a speedy deletion tag from UXP Systems Inc., a page you have created yourself. If you believe the page should not be deleted, you may contest the deletion by clicking on the button that says: Contest this speedy deletion which appears inside the speedy deletion notice. This will allow you to make your case on the talk page. Administrators will consider your reasoning before deciding what to do with the page. Thank you. TonyBallioni (talk) 14:36, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Please do not remove speedy deletion notices from pages you have created yourself, as you did with this edit to UXP Systems Inc.. Please make your case on the page's talk page instead if you disagree with the deletion. Thank you. Hayman30 (talk) 14:47, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Warnings

If you indulge in disruptive behaviour again, such as removing deletion notices from the page, I will block you immediately, see WP:Own
You have an obvious conflict of interest and you must declare it. If you work directly or indirectly for the company, or otherwise are acting on its behalf, you are very strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. Regardless, if you are paid directly or indirectly by the organisation you are writing about, 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:Cvedd-paddick. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Cvedd-paddick|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If you are being compensated, please provide the required disclosure. Note that editing with a COI is discouraged, but permitted as long as it is declared. Concealing a COI can lead to a block. Please do not edit further until you respond to this message.
I've removed the worst of the spam from the article to give it a chance of survival. If you restore it, I'll delete the article myself, rather than leave it for another editor to decide.

Note that references should not contain bare urls, see Tesco as an example, but remember to answer my COI request before you do anything else Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:35, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimfbleak

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).

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

Request reason:

I have currently just had a chance to log onto Wikipedia and feel that your decision to block my account indefinitely within a few hours of no response is extremely hasty. Thank you for your tip about the disclosure, I was not paid for this contribution, my knowledge of the software comes from academic studies. If this is something that is necessary to disclose, I would be happy to do so. Furthermore, I would liek to have to the opportunity to contribute to the encyclopedia in a meaningful way, however you have prevented me from learning and growing from this decision. I am asking you to revise your decision in good faith, and allow me to learn how to appropriately share with the Wikipedia community and adjust any further promotional language you believe is still present in the current article. Thanks for your consideration

Decline reason:

Given the blatantly promotional, buzzword-laden tone of the page you wrote, I don't think your claim of being a masters student who academically studies software is accurate. To provide just one example of how your approach differed from that of an academic researcher, you cited business directories and press releases, not peer-reviewed scholarly papers. Huon (talk) 00:26, 26 August 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.

Comment as a non-admin User_talk:TonyBallioni#Response_for_your_speedy_request_to_deletion may provide more context for this block. Jim left the user above blocked, and I'm inclined to agree with him: this is a user who created a G11-eligible article nearly perfectly in one edit and tried to save it from deletion by invoking our behavioral guidelines almost to the word (BITE and AGF). This seems to be a spam-only account that has been around the block before. TonyBallioni (talk) 02:51, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comment as deleting admin. The text I removed was replaced by an ISP editor. However, I haven't made a checkuser request, so I can't be absolutely sure it was you. If you genuinely are not connected to the company, I suggest that you learn your way around Wikipedia by editing existing articles rather than creating promotional articles from scratch. When you feel ready, you could then try creating an article (see WP:YFA), but I would suggest that you pick a topic other than UPX; if you genuinely don't have a COI, that shouldn't matter to you. If you return to UPX, that would raise obvious concerns. I'll leave it to others to consider your unblock request. Pinging TonyBallioni for info Jimfbleak - talk to me? 05:39, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]
- CU would not be useful in this case because they do not connect IPs to accounts and won't run a fishing expedition of an account without another to compare to. TonyBallioni (talk) 05:46, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Jimfbleak I was not the source of the rerouted IP, it does not make sense for me to ask for your assistance in making my article less promotional and acceptable to Wikipedia standards if I was just going to restore your efforts to try and assist me. I cannot however gain experience on Wikipedia if this unnecessary block from the entire site remains.

Thanks TonyBallioni. Cvedd-paddick, I accept that the restored text was probably not posted by you. However, everything else Tony, Huon and I have said still applies. I see no undertaking in your comment above to steer clear of UPX or similar company/product pages if you were unblocked, and that's normally a prerequisite for being allowed to edit Jimfbleak - talk to me? 06:36, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]