Jump to content

User talk:Dlawless

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

Welcome

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia. We appreciate encyclopedic contributions, but some of your recent contributions seem to be advertising or for promotional purposes. Wikipedia does not allow advertising in articles. For more information on this, see

If you still have questions, there is a new contributor's help page, or you can write {{helpme}} below this message along with a question and someone will be along to answer it shortly. You may also find the following pages useful for a general introduction to Wikipedia.

I hope you enjoy editing Wikipedia! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. Feel free to write a note on the bottom of my talk page if you want to get in touch with me. Again, welcome! --illumi 21:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your edit to a.o. Kitchen cabinet

[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia. However, one or more of the external links you added to the page Kitchen cabinet do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about in the article Kitchen cabinet, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

  1. editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
  2. participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
  3. linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
    and you must always:
  4. avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, verifiability, and autobiography.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Business' FAQ. For more details about what constitutes a conflict of interest, please see Wikipedia:Conflict of Interest. Thank you. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:45, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Your linkadditions got reported to our WikiProject on Spam, could you please react there: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Spam#http:.2F.2Fwww.slidedummy.info. --Dirk Beetstra T C 21:48, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is the last warning you will receive for your disruptive edits. The next time you insert a spam link, you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Persistent spammers may have their websites blacklisted preventing anyone from linking to them from all Wikimedia sites as well potentially being penalized by search engines. OhNoitsJamie Talk 19:55, 3 July 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

that isn't true, I edited the smash brothers page once too. Also, is the point to provide relevant information? or is it to arbitrarily exclude whoever you don't want?

Decline reason:

The only edits you have made from this account can be seen here. All your edits are to add this link. This is absolutely not allowed, and you are rightly blocked. Sam Korn (smoddy) 00:10, 4 July 2008 (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.

http://spam.hingedummy.info

[edit]
W
W

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia for continuing to add spam links. If you wish to make useful contributions, you may place {{unblock}} on your user talk page to have the block reviewed. Persistent spammers will have their websites blacklisted from Wikipedia. OhNoitsJamie Talk 20:06, 3 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This blocked user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request.
Dlawless (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
12.160.155.78 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RDNS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Dlawless". The reason given for Dlawless's block is: "Spam / advertising-only account".

Decline reason: You have been blocked directly as stated in your block log. Since you have not provided a reason for being unblocked, your request has been declined. You may provide a reason for being unblocked by adding {{unblock | your reason here}} to the bottom of your talk page, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Tiptoety talk 20:50, 3 July 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was blocked for spamming, but the link I provided is by far more relevant than the other links provided and is even more informative than the article Wiki has posted. I put it back up after an administrator took it down, but I didn't realize it was an admin taking it down or I would have tried to resolve it in another way. Hingedummy.info was listed by me in the "hinge" article. I think by viewing the site you will clearly see that there is no reason for it to be removed. The other site links are clearly to businesses and were left up, it makes no sense to me, that's why I thought it was someone from the other link that had taken mine down.

Decline reason:

All the edits you have ever made have been to add external links. This is obviously a spam only account: the block is entirely correct. Sam Korn (smoddy) 21:33, 3 July 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

That is only a history of the last couple of years, I have been a member longer than that under other names possibly, and have edited other pages. All I am asking is for someone to actually view hingedummy.info and see what an informative and useful site it is. It is better than the wiki article and I don't see any reason to exlude it when there are other links on the "hinge" article that are specifically there to sell things. Yet, mine is edited out just because it appears to be spam? No, it is valuable information and people use it in such a manner. Actually look at the site please someone. The link had been up for over a year and a half, why remove it in the first place?

Decline reason:

You don't get to put up links to your own websites. Period. If you think the link belongs, you can tell other editors about it on the article talk page, and they'll independently see if it should go in. --jpgordon∇∆∇∆ 19:22, 7 July 2008 (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.

.

Thank you jpgordon, you are the first admin that actually took the time to review what happened and give me some information as to how the site could be included. The rest of these guys are little power tripping idiots with nothing better to do than surf wiki. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dlawless (talk • contribs) 14:33, 8 July 2008

--Ronz (talk) 20:53, 9 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Dlawless&oldid=1087689597"