User talk:HarmonyPublicSchools

July 2019

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 about some topic other than 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. Drmies (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

\

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

I was unaware of the policy, but understand it now. My intention was to correct outdated and/or unsourced information.

Decline reason:

You have not addressed your inappropriate edits. Yamla (talk) 20:35, 29 July 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Respectfully, I would like to explain my edit. The portion of the post was edited because an unknown poster accused this U.S. public school of being linked to an international terrorist organization, offering no citation to back up such a dangerous claim. Citation provided later in the section does not relate to the statement made and in fact refutes it. However, the initial poster misconstrued the information to create an inaccurate narrative. Previous attempts to address these concerns and the overall lack of citation can be found in the "Talk" section of the page in question dating back to February 2018. If not corrected, the accusation could put the lives of the children who attend this school in danger.

Decline reason:

Only one open unblock request at a time, please. SQL ^{Query me!} 03:49, 17 August 2019 (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 does not address your violations of WP:COI at all. --Yamla (talk) 14:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Additionally, you have clearly been violating WP:SOCK with regard to Tlankford1977. As such, I have modified your block to reflect this. --Yamla (talk) 14:50, 31 July 2019 (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).

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

Request reason:

Respectfully, Wikipedia initially asked me to explain my violation in an appeal. I did so -- that as a Wikipedia novice I was not aware of the policy about organizations suggesting edits to their own pages, but now that I was, I would not violate it again. You rejected the appeal and asked me to explain my edit. So my last unblock attempt was an attempt to explain my edit. Respectfully, as a Wikipedia novice I cannot guess the correct answer or right combination of words that you are looking for. I'm also not sure what your SOCK comment refers to, but based upon the link provided, you seem to suggest the tlankford account also belongs to me, which it does not. I was only pointing it out as a third-party source who affirmed the accuracy of the edits I made. As an admin, I'm not sure what access you have to account users, but would IP and email addresses be able to prove/disprove that one way or another? Separately from the tlankford account, I can also provide third-party reputable news sources that provide citation for my edits (there is currently no citation made by the original poster of the content in question, and in fact it specifically says the "accounts" were "anonymous." Again, I am not a Wikipedia expert, so I do not know the correct process or protocol for addressing incorrect information or account violations. Is this something that can be better discussed in an email or phone call?

Decline reason:

Procedural decline as stale; this request has not proven sufficiently convincing for an administrator to take action. You are free to make a new request(which must be done here and not through email or the phone). 331dot (talk) 07:16, 6 September 2019 (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.