User talk:SmashCas

June 2020

Hello SmashCas. The nature of your edits, such as the one you made to Online casino, gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists. If the article does not exist, paid advocates are extremely strongly discouraged from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:SmashCas. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=SmashCas|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. RandomCanadian (talk / contribs) 16:07, 8 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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 other than promoting 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. 331dot (talk) 09:34, 9 June 2020 (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).

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

Request reason:

I run Smash Casinos, among other sites, and am not paid/solicited to post here. Having worked in the gambling industry for 15 years, there were a number of discrepancies on certain topics of yours such as Live Roulette e.t.c where the content I added was both genuine and factual. The pages I referenced included my own site - as I've seen Wizard of Odds, BonusHunter and others do here, so assumed it was perfectly valid as long as the page I referred to addressed the subject and cited the information I shared. The Street Fighter post I have placed on my site is 2000+ characters and breaks down all the elements of the game, refers explicitly to the game and also the citation between NetEnt and CapCom (as I referenced here). I apologise if this was seen as 'soliciting a link' but I did not attempt to hide the reference nor manipulate it - placing it as a reference and not a blatant link. Please unblock my account and restore the Street Fighter article - but the amendments I make to the online casino pages and other areas I will remove any references and allow others to add their own as they were more 'peripheral information pieces'. FYI - The live casino page uses 'mimicks' and not 'mimics' so some of my recommendations were to be spelling and minor edits, just haven't got round to them. Happy to answer any other questions you may have and hope this suffices to explain that my contributions are not paid or intended to deceive

Decline reason:

Please propose a new username. Although your forthrightness is appreciated, your Wikipedia account can't use the name of a website or company. You should also indicate that you have read and now understand our guideline on how to manage a conflict of interest, in particular citing yourself. The problem with citing yourself on Wikipedia is that it is frequently seen as self-promotional. Because Google ranks us highly, we attract a lot of spammers who are more interested in redirecting traffic to their own website than volunteering to make Wikipedia better. Thus, it's a bit difficult to get your own work on Wikipedia. If you're legitimately interested in contributing to Wikipedia, it would help if you committed to sticking to mainstream reliable sources, avoiding self-published blogs, and agreed to follow our best practices for COI editors. We just want to be sure that you're here for the right reasons – to improve the quality of Wikipedia's articles, not to drive traffic to your own website. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 23:04, 26 June 2020 (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.

Can someone please review— Preceding unsigned comment added by SmashCas (talk • contribs)

Can somebody actually review this please— Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.30.254.102 (talk)

You only need one open request, duplicate requests have no effect. Subsequent comments should be unformatted comments. If you are this user, remember to log in before commenting. Administrators are volunteer editors who do what they can when they can. You will need to be patient. You can use this time to perhaps improve your request to make it more persuasive. 331dot (talk) 11:46, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

UNblock

If you can show me where people are referencing their own sites, I'd like to know. That sounds like linkspam. I'd like to educate them. "All content must be cited from reliable sources that are unconnected with the subject and have a reputation for fact checking."

Please see a list of below entries whose pages include blatant casino/sportsbook advertising - this was accumulated in about 5 minutes https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Roulette#Real-life_roulette_exploits (Citation 10) https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Sports_betting#cite_note-51 - noted affiliate https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Sports_betting#cite_note-82 - noted affiliate Also examples of 'businesses' listing themselves to solicit a link https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Mfortune - posted by casino itself This is not designed to point fingers - just to explain why I assumed when crediting a source such as your own site it would be acceptable if the content was applicable.

As you run Smash Casinos, WP:COI and WP:PAID do apply. Looks to me like as you run Smash Casinos, you do need a conforming user name. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 12:25, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My user name was SmashCas (This is what I normally use when registering accounts so used the same and didn't try to hide things)

Please clarify Wizard of odds. I don't see an article for BonusHunter. What other? Looks to me like you must agree to not edit or link to Smash Casionos. Please tell us what constructive edits you would make. I do not see where you edited or created a Street Fighter article. Was that via this account? Thanks, --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 12:36, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please see reply to first comment

Happy to go through all gambling entries and update on what's current and what's been updated. For example your live casino section ended in about 2015 - there are now multiple new games from numerous other providers which are more popular and have much higher stakes placed on them In regards to Streetfighter, the slot machine was the most popular one ever and has been pulled offline recently due to potentially hazardous betting habits. It is being brought back online shortly but this is one of the only games to have ever been recalled and within such a short space of time (4 days after launch). While this is covered heavily by other affiliates now - the launch of the slot machine had not been documented and I was tipped off from within the community so got my review up fairly early - hence why cited my own. Happy to declare that I had an interest here of course - wasn't done to be malicious - but to get credit for the edit that I made since the information cited was my own. (hope that sounds reasonable)

Thanks. I think I got all that. I'll leave another admin to review the block, as you have been pleasant and I'm reluctant to decline the unblock, though I cannot accept the request either. --Deep fried okra (schalte ein) 15:02, 9 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No worries at all and you have also asked very fair questions so am happy to wait. Hopefully someone will be able to remove the block soon - many thanks

Is anyone able to sort this please SmashCas (talk) 09:22, 11 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]