User talk:Sammanson

May 2022

Hello, I'm Firefly. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. firefly ( t · c ) 15:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Firefly, I'm struggling to see how the contributions may be interpreted as "promotional"? It is an artist page like many other made for AWAL artists. Music.HushPuppy (talk) 16:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because of the following problems: 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, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

You may request a change of username and unblock if you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization. To do this, first search Special:CentralAuth for available usernames that comply with the username policy. Once you have found an acceptable username, 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 your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked. In your reasons, you must:

Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
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.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. The Blade of the Northern Lights (話して下さい) 16:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you could kindly refer to my latest appeal :) thank you Sammanson (talk) 06:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #57927

is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 16:51, 4 May 2022 (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.

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

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

Unfortunately, the artist in question has a similar name to a now incarcerated Nigerian artist ‘HushPuppi', popular in the US, (with the act I'm attempting to write about trading under the name ‘Hush Puppy', in Australia). I sadly keep being informed by local clientele of mine that their search results are polluted with pages of various similar names damaging representation.

I'm wishing to be able to have my accounts, ‘Apeal Block’ form properly acknowledged, due to the reputation concerns stated above if possible.

I wish to be able to further prove that my account is in fact legitimate and deserving of such due to these peculiar circumstances. I've also been informed by multiple other writers that my account/page made for said artist, supposedly does in-fact not fall with-in "promotional" content. This is easily noticed when comparing my proposed article against other Wiki articles of 'AWAL' artists - eg; 'Spacey Jane'.

I’m willing to provide any information requested; government identity, music streaming platform analytics, news articles, screenshots, screencasts, registered business documentation, etc - if it means I’m able not have an artists reputation jeopardised for simply having a similar title to another person with criminal convictions.Music.HushPuppy (talk) 17:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I have renamed your account, which resolves that part of the block. I'm not ready to endorse removing the block at this time. I think there are still some clarifications that are needed around notability and your interest in this band's online reputation. I am declining your request. You may make another for someone else to review; any future decision is up to them, not me. 331dot (talk) 13:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please realize that Wikipedia only accepts articles about notable topics - in the case of musicians, those that pass the notability criteria for musicians. You would be expected to provide evidence of this band receiving significant coverage from multiple reliable and independent sources to demonstrate that they are worthy of inclusion. We don't accept articles solely at the behest of their subjects.

Please check with Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources to see how commonly-discussed sources about music topics have been evaluated for their reliability. Also, know that self-authored sources (ie. by the band or their representatives) are disqualified from establishing them as notable.

Finally, if you are representing this band's interests and getting paid to do so, then you must disclose this information in accordance with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure policy. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 18:23, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate this information - I enjoy writing about new AWAL artists. Would you believe that this would be worth discussing with my attorney? Music.HushPuppy (talk) 18:30, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not certain what, if any, benefit that will have. What are you hoping to achieve by doing so? --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It may be worth perusing legally considering my account was inappropriately 'banned'? There must be some form of freedom of speech/transparency act in violation here. I'm interested in preventing artist's from having their online reputation tarnished :) Music.HushPuppy (talk) 19:32, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What you just stated could be perceived as a legal threat. Wikipedia has a strict policy against threatening legal action against the site or its editors. I urge you to retract your above statement, or an administrator may decide to revoke your access to this talk page.

Please also be aware that Wikipedia is a privately owned website and access to it is governed by its terms of use. You have no legal right to edit Wikipedia; it is a privilege, in accordance with your compliance of its rules. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 19:43, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd appreciate knowing why my account was banned? It appears as though I have fortunately not violated anything by creating an artist's biography page due to privacy concerns. Am I able to discuss this further with someone who is able to elaborate on the matter, thanks :) Music.HushPuppy (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have an open unblock request, so an administrator will respond when they are available. They are often backlogged with requests, so it could take time. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 20:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:FREESPEECH. Free speech means that the government will not punish or jail you for your speech; it does not mean that private entities cannot restrict speech(such as you in your residence; I can't enter your home and force you to hear my views on a topic). You are blocked for the reason stated in the block notice above, for violating various Wikipedia policies. As Drm310 says above, I strongly advise you to withdraw your legal threat. We cannot stop you from pursuing legal action, but you cannot make legal threats on Wikipedia, nor can you edit here if you have a legal action underway. You can pursue your grievances on Wikipedia using Wikipedia processes, or by using the courts of your country, but not both. If you choose not to withdraw it, this unblock request will be closed and you may then request unblock when the legal action is resolved or concluded.

Wikipedia has no control over internet search results, and our only interest is in summarizing what independent reliable sources state about topics that meet Wikipedia's definition of notability, such as notable musicians or bands. You should contact Google or other search engines for any possible assistance with differentiating search results. 331dot (talk) 20:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, it unfortunately appears as though you've misinterpreted my comment as a "threat"? I can assure you this is not the case. If you read my initial comment I was actually asking a question, what was implied was more along the lines of - 'IS' this situation 'WORTH' discussing further with an attorney/perusing legally? Only of course in a case where my account has been blocked, preventing me from ever making the information publicly available myself.

And what is to happen with 'redirect' links (URL/Article Title's) that are taking opportunity away from notable artists having their Wiki's named appropriately after them?

Simply after advice from the experienced writers here on Wikipedia (such as yourselves), as to what to do in these situations/the even more unique situation where an artist perhaps, in-fact needs a Wiki page... More so for disassociation from a criminal affiliated artist with a similar name, as opposed to sheer notability.

What is in place here on Wikipedia to protect artist's images/representations? Music.HushPuppy (talk) 00:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you are asking us if you should talk with your attorney, that is something that only you can decide, as we here on Wikipedia cannot give you legal advice. Saying "should I talk to my attorney" sounds like you are going to initiate a legal action regarding this situation in some way. You also mentioned the legal action in relation to this block and said your free speech is being violated. If you are not making a legal threat, okay.

There are ways to ensure accurate information and protected reputations here for Wikipedia content within Wikipedia; content about living people is governed by the Biographies of Living Persons policy. We have no control over the rest of the global internet, however. This artist who I assume you represent will not get an article merely to affect Google/other search engine search results. I can only suggest that you contact Google and other search engines to see if they can help differentiate search results geographically(so that Australians searching might find your musician and not the Nigerian criminal). Our only concern is whether a musician meets our definition of a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 01:09, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If an artist meets the listed criteria - how can the article proceed further? Music.HushPuppy (talk) 01:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID and tell us how your future edits will be consistent with those policies. If this artist meets one of the listed criteria, and receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources completely unconnected with them, an article may be possible. Usually those in your position, however, aren't the best ones to write it, due to differing mindsets and goals. 331dot (talk) 01:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am shortly leaving my computer; any admin may take action on this request if they wish, do not wait for me. 331dot (talk) 01:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you elaborating on this for me - mighty handy, thank you :)

I'm fortunately not 'paid' to write about this artist, I have been fortunate enough to attend their shows/follow their journey - being from the same city, as well as other Perth based acts such as, 'Spacey Jane' and 'End Of Fashion' for example.

I've managed to find reliable sources used in 'Spacey Jane's Wiki article, which also apply to many of the statements I mentioned about 'Hush Puppy'.

It would be spectacular if someone is able to explain what I have done that is in fact deserving of an 'account ban'? It is to my knowledge that I've managed to follow policy - I was not in any way attempting to 'hijack' an existing article?

Apologies for any inconveniences caused here - I am trying my best to improve. Music.HushPuppy (talk) 02:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If there's a way I am able to further prove that I am not 'paid' to write this article, I'd be happy to oblige :) As for the other links you've supplied, I'm happy to take note and better cite the article/sources. I'm not attempting to be difficult or bother anyone by any means. I'd like to be able to further progress my article about the artist moor formally and with heavy attention to the links you've provided me with. Music.HushPuppy (talk) 02:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note that any paid relationship with a topic makes one a paid editor, you don't have to be specifically paid to edit. You mention "registered business documentation" that you wanted to offer in relation to this, this (along with your interest in their reputation and wanting to talk to an attorney) is why I thought you are a paid editor. If you aren't, okay. Do you have any conflict of interest at all(even if unpaid)? The main red flag you tripped was converting a redirect into an article without any sort of consensus. If this band meets at least one aspect of WP:BAND(the editor who first reverted your edit did not think so), a draft may be created and submitted via Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 08:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I see where you are coming from now :) I was under the impression that the 'redirect' link (since predominately used to link 'similar' or 'misspelt' subjects to their supposed 'correct' articles), was simply available to repurpose when seemingly fit - my mistake. The thought process was to simply repurpose what I thought was an unused article title, my intention was NOT to 'hijack' or harm anyone els's pieces... again - apologies. Music.HushPuppy (talk) 12:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Are you employed by or associated with AWAL? You mention clientele. 331dot (talk) 13:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm interested in the artists in my city that end up signing with AWAL because of how exclusive they are and how far away Perth is from it. Music.HushPuppy (talk) 13:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I previously mention AWAL as they are listed as a credible source on Wiki pages I'm referencing. Not because I am employed or work for the company... Music.HushPuppy (talk) 13:33, 5 May 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Fortunately, I am not receiving any form of compensation for my contributions (I am not an affiliate of said artist or record company). Having the situation above explained to me, I do understand why it may have been perceived as such - all though not the case, I appreciate it being elaborated upon. I also now know that my approach of contribution was done inappropriately, was informed that editing a 'redirect' link is frowned upon and considered 'hijacking'. If unblocked I will be taking the stated into consideration for my future contributions. My intent was not to advertise, or provide false misinformation to potential readers, but to simply inform/clear up confusion likely surrounding the similarity in article titles. It is to my knowledge that I have in fact hyper linked credible resources to already related, existing wikipedia pages. For future contributions I intend to provide further citations as well as highlight sources used by further discussing them within the article/making them more obvious. Thank you for your time :)

Decline reason:

Confirmed block evasion as Mr.Manson99 and SamManson99. I'm assuming good faith and not extending the block further on this account, but any further evidence of WP:EVADE may result in your ban, not just block, so please don't do it again. You are free to make a new unblock request that addresses this evasion. I'd also like to see why you are so laser-focused on a single band. In particular, your usernames are similar, though not identical to, one of the members of that band. Yamla (talk) 09:39, 6 May 2022 (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).

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

Request reason:

Thank you for this information - my apologies, I was under the impression that for me to be able to be able to communicate further with administrators to justify my unusual contributions, that I would need to do so using an alternate account in attempt to further discuss the situation on my original account's wall (hence similar usernames, in hopes of preventing confusion)... It wasn't until shortly after that I realised, I was in-fact still able to communicate with yourselves even from my blocked user (which was a relief). I also wanted to attempt to correct my accidental 'hijacking', as I felt remorse after finding out, that editing a redirect link tarnishes someone els's writing. Also attempted to fix my mistake of not submitting a 'draft article' first. And to address the second concern of yours (an impressive observation), the 'Sam' in my username is actually short for SAMantha. I enjoy spending my free time following Perth artists. The acts that manage to catch the attention of prestigious, international labels (especially out of such an isolated city), I believe are a spectacular opportunity for myself to contribute to Wikipedia (having taken into account other acts achieving such with Wikipedia articles) because of my passion for the music scene/writing. I did plan on writing articles in future about other acts that manage to break the scene and receive international recognition/signed by major music labels. But, again- apologies for the inconveniences, I am still learning and would like to continue to learn and improve - if you'd kindly let me. Thanks again for your time :) Sam.

Decline reason:

Further block evasion. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:21, 14 June 2022 (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 makes no sense. You were communicating/are communicating fine w/o evading your block. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

UTRS appeal #58156

is closed. --Deepfriedokra (talk) 07:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

In regards to your comment, I don't know how to further prove to you that what I stated in my appeal was in fact what I believed to be true at the time. I do apologies, the accounts were created out of panic of losing communication with administrators, to further explain my case and that I do in-fact mean well. This is becoming rather disheartening - I'm only wishing to contribute with my knowledge of 'break-thru' Australian acts. Confused as to how to redeem myself here. It was an honest mistake, I was uneducated in the platforms publishing prerequisites. I am now better versed and wish to only contribute helpfully. My mistakes made previously will not happen again :) Sammanson (talk) 07:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fortunately, I am not receiving any form of compensation for my contributions (I am not an affiliate of said artist or record company). Having the situation above explained to me, I do understand why it may have been perceived as such - all though not the case, I appreciate it being elaborated upon.

I was under the (wrong) impression that for me to be able to be able to communicate further with administrators to justify my unusual contributions, that I would need to do so using an alternate account in attempt to further discuss the situation on my original account's wall (hence similar usernames, in hopes of preventing confusion)... It wasn't until shortly after that I realised, I was in-fact still able to communicate with yourselves even from my 'blocked' user (which was a relief, as it meant the alternate accounts are no longer needed). I also wanted to attempt to correct my accidental 'hijacking', as I felt remorse after finding out, that editing a redirect link tarnishes someone els's writing.

My free time is spent following Perth artists. In particular, the acts that manage to receive attention from prestigious, international labels (which I find to be of significance, due to Perth's geographical isolation). Writing articles about said type of acts, is an opportunity for myself to be able to contribute to Wikipedia's ever-growing knowledge of 'break-thru' artists. As my experience attending performances by these acts before their now achieved success, makes me somewhat knowledgeable of them. I plan on writing articles in future about other acts that manage to break the scene and receive international recognition/sign to major music labels.

I am still learning and would like to continue to learn and improve - if you'd kindly let me. I do now understand why the initial blocks were placed on my account and I'd like to assure the administrator reading this that it will not happen again. And in future if you believe I've somehow violated terms again, I'd understand the consequences - and accept that there would be no room for excuses if I were to be confronted with such again in future. Sammanson (talk) 08:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You have an open request above; only one open request is needed at a time. 331dot (talk) 08:19, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see - how may I have my open request reviewed. This is becoming rather saddening, hopefully someone is able to give me the time of day... Sammanson (talk) 08:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Would you recommend I get a fellow follower of this scene to submit these contributions from their own IP address - since I am being ignored?

No. This would be an absolutely terrible idea. See WP:EVADE and WP:MEAT. You aren't being ignored, there are a lot of unblock requests. You had your first unblock request reviewed and declined and you had your second unblock request reviewed and declined, where we found you had been evading your block. You had your third unblock request (via UTRS) reviewed and declined. It generally takes increasingly longer to have subsequent requests reviewed; we are all volunteers here, and you've had a number of requests reviewed. --Yamla (talk) 10:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you getting back to me - It is to my knowledge that if someone else decides to publish contributions of the same topic, it would not be considered 'block evasion' - regardless, I'd really love to simply start contributing my knowledge of this aspect of the music scene, so please do get back to me when possible. Thanks friend :) Sammanson (talk) 10:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to think I've addressed the concerns mentioned by administrators in my appeal declines, to no viable progress - which is why I started suggesting alternatives - If I could have some of the ambiguity cleared up as to what exactly I'm being declined for, that'd be spectacular :) As viewing all of the supporting links supplied by yourselves, it appears as though I am no longer in breach of anything? Thanks for your time, if it wasn't for volunteers, Wikipedia would be chaos, so all is appreciated. Sammanson (talk) 10:27, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you ask someone else to edit for you, (including a general request not aimed at a particular person) that is block evasion and will get the person who does it blocked too, and make it harder for you to be unblocked. 331dot (talk) 10:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Noted - thank you, if you could kindly acknowledge my other, arguably more important concerns within the same comment... thank you :) Sammanson (talk) 10:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I only wished to clarify that point. I've already closed a prior request and have nothing else to add right now. 331dot (talk) 12:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Okie dokie - ready when you are Sammanson (talk) 13:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, hoping we're able to move forward? I'd like to think I have in-fact learnt my lesson... again, I DO feel bad for disrupting the way things work on Wikipedia and sincerely apologise for the considerably bizarre behaviour. Would be happy to be able to just work on my article in my account's draft space and not, 'move' it or 'hijack' someone else's work by accident again. I'd like to be able to say that I've successfully published a Wikipedia article one day, especially if it's on an act I enjoy. Thanks. Sammanson (talk) 08:40, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's a grim feeling not being able to contribute after attempting to submit one article. Sammanson (talk) 08:44, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]