User talk:MarkCamilleriPhD
Welcome
[edit]
|
MarkCamilleriPhD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • abuse filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
UTRS appeal #20532 was submitted on Feb 04, 2018 17:10:48. This review is now closed.
--UTRSBot (talk) 17:10, 4 February 2018 (UTC)
Unblock request
[edit]
Administrator note This user has had their UTRS appeal procedurally declined with instructions to request unblock on their talk page. To keep things simple, and per WP:BITE, I've copied their block appeal here for them. Swarm ♠ 11:34, 6 February 2018 (UTC)
MarkCamilleriPhD (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Why do you believe you should be unblocked? Wikipedia user: JzG maintains that I am using Wikipedia for self promotion. Please note that I have created a page, entitled; "Airline Product" that was drawn from my latest textbook (that was published by Springer and endorsed my numerous academics)for the benefit of Wikipedia users, including students in travel and tourism. I am a new user in Wikipedia - however I am an experienced academic, researcher, editor and writer. I am a prolific author who writes for academic journals. Please note that I did NOT infringe Wikipedia's rules. I have created a useful page with just two references. I have other relevant content for Wikipedia, if you let me support you. If you are unblocked, what articles do you intend to edit? Business topics, including; marketing, strategy, tourism marketing, airline marketing, et cetera. I look forward to adding value to Wikipedia. Why do you think there is a block currently affecting you? If you believe it's in error, tell us how. Your editors have blocked me as they believe that I am promoting my work. Please note that I have inserted important content (a page on "airline product") for travel and tourism students. Is there anything else you would like us to consider when reviewing your block? I would like to support Wikipedia in developing its content (that is related to my expertise)
Decline reason:
(1) I have checked every one of your edits, including those which have been deleted. If you can sincerely say that somebody merely "maintains that [you are] using Wikipedia for self promotion" (my emphasis) then you have such a lack of ability to see the nature of your own editing that you are unlikely to be able to contribute in the neutral way required. Virtually every edit you have ever made is an unmistakable attempt to publicise your book. (2) You say "I did NOT infringe Wikipedia's rules" (your emphasis) despite having persistently edited in blatant violation of Wikipedia policies and guidelines, continuing to do so after having been informed of them, so you appear not to understand what you were told. If that is so then you are likely to find it difficult to avoid making the same mistake again. (3) In your unblock request you have not said that in future you will abstain from writing about your own work, and it is clear from the wording of the request that you have such a high regard for your own work that you think you are doing a favour by publicising it here. That must lead to doubts as to whether you will continue to do so again. Those doubts must remain unless you explicitly state that you will not. (4) Even in the small bits of your editing that do not relate directly to your own book, you do not seem to be able to recognise the difference between neutral reporting and promotional writing. For example, you replaced a neutral definition of "marketing" as "bringing a product to market" with "providing the right products or services that customers need, want or desire", which is unmistakable marketing-speak, written in the way a marketing professional would write if he or she wished to impress the reader with what a wonderful and beneficial thing marketing is. That casts doubt on the likelihood of your editing neutrally in future, even if you sincerely intend to do so. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:24, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
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.
- In relation to my comments in declining your unblock request above, I should like to say that I am perfectly willing to believe that you have been acting in good faith, and I have no reason to doubt your sincerity. However, my experience as a Wikipedia administrator over the last seven and a half years has taught me that people who work in marketing are so used to dealing with marketing language all day throughout their working life that they become desensitised to it, with the result that very often they genuinely cannot see that their own writing will be seen as blatantly promotional to outsiders, so that they are likely to write in promotional ways even if they honestly think they are not doing so. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 12:31, 12 February 2018 (UTC)
- This. Exactly this. Guy (Help!) 12:33, 12 February 2018 (UTC)