User talk:Sajohnson
Sajohnson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • autoblocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Requested username:
Request reason:
Decline reason:
Sajohnson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
error messages still saying cannot edit pages on Wiki due to Autoblock of IP
Decline reason:
It is clear that this account is being used to evade the block on the account Adamneat, and also that it exists for the sole purpose of using Wikipedia for promotional purposes. Either one of those facts would be sufficient grounds for blocking this account, so it is now blocked directly, regardless of the autoblock. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 10:18, 14 September 2016 (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.
Please provide the full message that you see when you try to edit, including the IP address and any other account names that are mentioned. If you wish to keep the IP address confidential, please use WP:UTRS to report it. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 09:32, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
hi thanks - this is the error message I received:
you are currently unable to edit pages on Wikipedia due to an autoblock affecting your IP address. This is because someone using this internet address or shared proxy server was blocked. The ability of all users on this IP address to edit pages has been automatically suspended to prevent abuse by the blocked party. Innocent users are sometimes caught in an autoblock. It may be the case that you have done nothing wrong.
A user of this IP address was blocked by Widr for the following reason (see our blocking policy): Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "Adamneat". The reason given for Adamneat's block is: "
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, 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.
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 this 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 by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.
".
This block has been set to expire: 04:14, 15 September 2016. The block ID is: 6881951.
Note that you have not been blocked from editing directly. Most likely your computer is on a shared network with other people.
- That's interesting, because User:Adamneat, who appears to use the same IP address as you, was blocked for promotional editing in the creation of the article DJ Adam Sky, which also contained copyright violations. And that, coincidentally, is the same subject that you want to write about. Also, your sandbox creation at User:Sajohnson/sandbox/DJAdamSky was essentially a cut-down version of the article created by User:Adamneat, with exactly the same format and containing copyright infringements of exactly the same source (before I deleted it for that reason). Is there, perhaps, any connection between you and User:Adamneat that we should know about? Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:09, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
{unblock| Hi thanks Boing! said Zebedee - this is starting to make sense. So as I mentioned earlier, Adamneat user is my partner. So I'm just helping him create a wiki page as we understand it, it has to be done by real people and not organisations. The copyright thing we never understood - we asked about what was infringing and we were told some online blog had same text as bio information he had originally put into his wiki page, but the supposed copyrighted information was his bio, and as such, he owned the copyright. All I'm trying to do is create a page, like the ones I mentioned above, no different, to capture information on him. Again I might be doing something wrong, but I'm pasting in text, editing/saving along the way, and whilst I understand we can't include promotional material, etc, I thought this was a non public sandbox?. Any pointers appreciated}}
- And the real life name of DJ Adam Sky just happens to be Adam Gary Neat. The coincidences keep piling up. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:26, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
Sajohnson (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Why have I been blocked again?! [User:JamesBWatson] I'm trying to fix and rectify this to be compliant. As I've said previously, Adamneat is my husband, I am his partner. I'm helping write a page on him. There is no coincidence - it just is. What I am missing. Please explain or give pointers to what I am missing as I suspect there is a misunderstanding somewhere. His original page was blocked because of supposed copyright infringements, but ironically, he owns the copyright yet without question, he was blocked. It would be more helpful if you gave us newbies pointers, instead of blocking without assistance - Boing! said Zebedee
Decline reason:
Since you admit WP:MEATPUPPETRY, there is no reason to unblock you. Vanjagenije (talk) 21:12, 16 September 2016 (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.
Sajohnson (talk) 10:39, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Using this account to evade a block on User:Adamneat to recreate the same article is not permitted - see WP:MEAT. User:Adamneat must request an unblock of his original account.
The fact that the subject/author of the article owns the copyright of the material is not sufficient for a couple of reasons. Firstly, Wikipedia is published under a CC BY-SA licence (which allows it to be reused by third parties), and all text and images added to Wikipedia must be explicitly released under a licence at least as free as that (see Wikipedia:Copyrights for more information). The text added has previously been published on the internet with a "© Copyright 2016. All Rights Reserved." notice. The second thing is that anyone could claim to be the owner of material they use (not that I'm doubting you, but we must act on the cautious side), and so such material needs to be released in compliance with Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials.
Before you think any more about creating an article about DJ Adam Sky, you should be aware that there are minimum notability requirements for subjects here (see WP:N) and that notability must be supported by multiple independent reliable sources writing about the subject in some depth (see WP:RS). The deleted versions of the articles I have seen had no such sources and no indication of notability. We also have some conflict of interest guidelines (see WP:COI), which strongly discourage editors from writing about themselves.
Oh, and User:Adamneat was blocked for promotional editing, as explained on his talk page - the copyright issue was a secondary problem. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 10:53, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Ok understood on the first point. But I thought from what I read, it couldn't be published by an organisation such as his management company or manager, so I thought I'd write it so it was non bias as his account was blocked. On the copyright point - that's very odd. He owns the copright and if you look at the dates of when things were published, you'll see that the original copy right was held by him. But I do understand now what you're saying about the release of copyright. That helps a lot. Infact, I think where we've come unstuck with that point is that both he and I were believing we were editing in a safe, restricted sandbox and nothing was intended to be published. I for example was saving content thinking it was draft and not being submitted for view. On the notability requirement - we never got that far as by the time we were at the point of editing, the pages were blocked before we could go back and update. Though, I do have numerous links and references to articles, rankings, charts, and so forth which are all industry accredited - numerous interviews in industry journals, global rankings, rankings on leading sites such as Beatport, Juice, Billboard, etc. Both he and I simply didn't update the page enough between submissions / saves, before they were reviewed. I'm taking it now that people must edit their wiki pages offline and then upload and edit in one hit. On the point of promotional - I understand. Similarly above, I was writing the content (as was he I'm sure) by copying in references from elsewhere - I know the format and style to use and would look to follow something like https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Alesso - How can we proceed? Sajohnson (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- (There's no need to put every reply in a new unblock request.) Your writing the article is really no different from the subject himself or his professional representatives writing it, as you all have a clear conflict of interest. As I suggested above, User:Adamneat should request unblock on his original account. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 12:04, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Ok understood on the first point. But I thought from what I read, it couldn't be published by an organisation such as his management company or manager, so I thought I'd write it so it was non bias as his account was blocked. On the copyright point - that's very odd. He owns the copright and if you look at the dates of when things were published, you'll see that the original copy right was held by him. But I do understand now what you're saying about the release of copyright. That helps a lot. Infact, I think where we've come unstuck with that point is that both he and I were believing we were editing in a safe, restricted sandbox and nothing was intended to be published. I for example was saving content thinking it was draft and not being submitted for view. On the notability requirement - we never got that far as by the time we were at the point of editing, the pages were blocked before we could go back and update. Though, I do have numerous links and references to articles, rankings, charts, and so forth which are all industry accredited - numerous interviews in industry journals, global rankings, rankings on leading sites such as Beatport, Juice, Billboard, etc. Both he and I simply didn't update the page enough between submissions / saves, before they were reviewed. I'm taking it now that people must edit their wiki pages offline and then upload and edit in one hit. On the point of promotional - I understand. Similarly above, I was writing the content (as was he I'm sure) by copying in references from elsewhere - I know the format and style to use and would look to follow something like https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Alesso - How can we proceed? Sajohnson (talk) 11:06, 14 September 2016 (UTC)
- Please bear in mind what I wrote above, that this account "exists for the sole purpose of using Wikipedia for promotional purposes". Many people come to Wikipedia for the purpose of publicising or promoting themselves, their businesses, their bands, their work, or whatever: in this case apparently their husband. I don't blame anyone for doing that, because there is no reason why someone new to Wikipedia should know that using Wikipedia for publicity or promotion is not considered acceptable. However, both you and your husband have shown no sign of any interest in contributing to Wikipedia in any other way than promotional for him, which is not consistent with Wikipedia policies. If you are interested in contributing in other ways, please let us know what other editing you would like to do, and we can consider unblocking you, but you are unlikely to be unblocked as long as it seems likely that you are just going to do the same sort of thing that you did before. The editor who uses the pseudonym "JamesBWatson" (talk) 14:16, 15 September 2016 (UTC)
JamesBWatson thanks - we hear you loud and clear. As I mentioned above, I was (like him) in the process of editing the pages but incorrectly assumed that the sandbox was just that, a sandbox, and that I could edit in there and play with the details and get right, before it fell under an admin's approval. As for other contributions, yes for sure. Admittedly as you said, he is new to editing Wiki but on occasions has been keen to contribute to other pages on music production, labels, discography, etc. He is signed to some large labels now and will be able to contribute to their pages also. Hope this helps.