User talk:Mailrugames

Please choose another username that represents a single individual and not a company

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because your username, Mailrugames, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. –MuZemike 23:35, 16 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm more than just a little concerned about WP:COI here .... do you care to elaborate? (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 11:44, 21 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Despite the fact that you have been given a block notice saying "Your username is the only reason for this block", there are in fact other problems too. Your account appears to exist for the purpose of publicising a game published by the company your name represents. This suggests at best that you have a conflict of interest, in which case you should probably not be editing on this subject, and at worst that this is an account intended only for advertising, in which case you certainly should not be editing at all. It is unlikely you will be unblocked unless you indicate that you do not intend to continue to use your account for promotion. If you indicate that your intention is to edit constructively on other subjects in which you do not have a conflict of interest then your request is more likely to be looked on positively. JamesBWatson (talk) 12:10, 22 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I understand the problem concerning this account. I am, as the nickname rightly suggests, an employee of the company of the same name. I understand that this would represent a conflict of interest in general circumstances. I would like to point out two things that are important to me, though: The article edited via this account is infact a translation of two articles which appeared in the wikipedia in other languages some time before that were published by authors not associated with our company. As I understand the flow of those articles they could be losely considered "fan art" and represent the importance of the game as perceived by the public. Hence my intension never was to advertise but to make the content available for English speaking audience after beeing pointed to the articles by users in our game. I had the basic Wiki idea of sharing information at heart when writing the article. Never the less I believe in the concept of the wikipedia and therefore support the decisions of your administration on both this account and the article regardless of the consequences. Mailrugames 15:48, 26 April 2011 (CET)

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).

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

Request reason:

COI circumstancial, account not intended for advertising

Decline reason:

You would have to agree to (a) change your account name, (b) stop editing articles related to your company. You would still be allowed to make proposals on the talk pages of those articles. Let us know if you will agree to this. EdJohnston (talk) 01:50, 28 April 2011 (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.

I agree with both terms (a) and (b). I have included the application for changing the account name. Thank you in advance.

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.

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

Requested username:

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

Decline reason:

EdJohnston has modified your block settings to allow for account creation, so an unblock of this account shouldn't be needed. -- Atama頭 19:45, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I have modified the block of Mailrugames so you should now be able to create the new account EmDoubleU. Please try to do that, and let us know if it works. Thanks, EdJohnston (talk) 13:52, 28 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]