User talk:Sibrostech

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Sibrostech, and welcome to Wikipedia! I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, such as User:Sibrostech/sandbox, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the Teahouse, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{help me}} on this page, followed by your question, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! @echo off 00:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of User:Sibrostech/sandbox[edit]

A tag has been placed on your user page, User:Sibrostech/sandbox, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something. Promotional editing of any kind is not permitted, whether it be promotion of a person, company, product, group, service, belief, or anything else. This is a violation of our policies regarding acceptable use of user pages — user pages are intended for active editors of Wikipedia to communicate with one another as part of the process of creating encyclopedic content, and should not be mistaken for free webhosting resources or advertising space. Please read the guidelines on spam, the guidelines on user pages, and, especially, our FAQ for Organizations.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, then please contact the deleting administrator. @echo off 00:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

December 2019[edit]

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. — RHaworth (talk · contribs) 02:05, 5 December 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.

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

Requested username:

SimiSrivas88 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

I would appreciate the opportunity to continue contributing to the Wikipedia community. By mistake, I thought that when I was creating the username of the account, that I was creating the title of the article. Thus my username and title of the article I submitted have the same name. I am suggesting a new username for my account, and have contested the speedy deletion of the article I submitted because I believe that article only had factual information about a company that I was interested in.

Decline reason:

You are attempting to mislead us. Your relationship with the company is far closer than you describe. You have been violating WP:COI and WP:PAID. You've also been violating WP:PROMO. Yamla (talk) 00:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

How did you come to write about this company? Whether you work for the company or not, the draft was blatantly promotional and mostly sourced to the company itself. Wikipedia is not for merely providing information or merely telling about something. Wikipedia articles must do more- they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the subject showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable company). Wikipedia is not interested in what a company says about itself, and an article should have little if any information from the company itself. "Startups" rarely meet the definition of a notable company, as they usually do not have significant coverage(press releases, routine announcements, and staff interviews do not count). What do you intend to write about if unblocked? 331dot (talk) 18:52, 5 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I came to know about this company from it being a sponsor of AutoMobility LA (an automotive convention) a few weeks ago. I thought it was something that may become of more prominence very soon, and wanted to write about it. Before writing I did look around on other Wikipedia pages of startups and thought that there may be enough information for it to be notable. However, I understand now that it is not yet a notable subject. If I were to be unblocked, I would contribute to the community by adding information on the automotive industry, either by contributing to existing articles or proposing new ones. The connected car or electric vehicle portion of the automotive industry is rapidly growing and I'd be interested in helping Wikipedia be up to date on new technology. This was my first time trying to be a contributor on Wikipedia and I definitely made mistakes, but I hope to have another chance at being a better community member. Thanks in advance for your response. Sibrostech (talk) 18:37, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You will need to make another unblock request, to be reviewed by someone else. You will need to address the points Yamla made as well. 331dot (talk) 18:50, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You will also need to start being honest, Sibrostech. We know your conflict of interest is far closer than you claim here. You will not be unblocked while you actively try to mislead us. --Yamla (talk) 19:18, 6 December 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).

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

Request reason:

I was told to submit a new unblock request so it can be reviewed by another admin. To address Yamla's point, I was not being paid to write the article, but I can see how I should have disclosed conflict of interest as I was personally interested in the company's future success, and I can see how it could be biased because of that. I missed the part of the guideline that listed to do so. It was my mistake, and I If I were to be reinstated I would be much more diligent about what I wrote being notable and relevant. I believe that I had misconceived what content was acceptable to draft on Wikipedia before now, and would like the opportunity to take this as a learning experience and do better in the future. Again, this was my first attempt at contributing to Wikipedia and I can see how it was a disaster because of several choices I made, and I would appreciate the chance to contribute in the future now that I have a much better understanding of Wikipedia guidelines.

Decline reason:

Per Yamla, below. Yunshui ^雲 _水 08:47, 9 December 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.

I very strongly urge the reviewing administrator to decline this unblock request. "I was personally interested in the company's future success" is nowhere close to transparently disclosing the exact conflict of interest here. Until this user is open and forthright and addresses their repeated unwillingness to properly disclose, they should remain blocked. --Yamla (talk) 19:44, 6 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have a couple questions on this topic. I'd like to disclose conflict of interest/being paid to write the article and try to write an article again on the same subject, since many more third party sources are available online now than there were in December. Is that possible within community guidelines? Or is that not sufficient reason to unblock on my account for a promotional username? Thanks in advance for your response.Sibrostech (talk) 00:02, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]