User talk:Taparchives

Welcome!

Hello, Taparchives, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

The five pillars of Wikipedia
Tutorial
How to edit a page and How to develop articles
How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{help me}} before the question. Again, welcome! Deb (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

August 2012

Welcome to Wikipedia. I saw your changes to Ian McKellen, and I noticed that the username you have chosen, "Taparchives", seems to imply that you are editing on behalf of a group, company or website. Please note that Wikipedia does not allow usernames that are promotional or appear to be shared by multiple people. Please take a moment to create a new account or request a username change that represents only yourself as an individual. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and remember that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose. If you believe that your username does not violate our policy, please leave a note here explaining why. Thank you. Your recent edits suggest that you're editing on behalf of this archive. GabrielF (talk) 15:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I am editing on behalf on the Victoria and Museum (London, England) Department of Theatre and Performance and am only adding links to archive catalogues written by us relating to individuals in the performing arts, all of which are available to access free on-line. We are non-profit and links are provided in good faith as educational tools and for academic reference. Taparchives (talk) 15:33, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, as noted below, you will need to use a different username. See the instructions below. Looking forward to seeing you under your new name. All the best! -- Ssilvers (talk) 09:44, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Theatre Royal, Dury Lane

Hello, please refrain from adding raw links such as you did here. Please see WP:CITE and WP:REFSTART for further guidence. Many thanks. -- Cassianto^Talk 16:22, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Additions of http://.archiveshub.ac.uk

Please stop. If you continue spamming Wikipedia, you will be blocked from editing.--Hu12 (talk) 18:39, 1 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, V&A museum folk. Please see above from Tim riley and me. -- Ssilvers (talk) 09:46, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello to Tim riley and Ssilvers. Your guidance would be very much appreciated. I seem to have come a cropper recently and have had a number of varying (and not always consistant) responses from some wikipedia editors. To clarify, I would like to post appropriate links (under "External link", now that I know!) on the pages of certain performers and institutions connected with performing arts in the UK. Under a different username would this be allowed? I would also be interested to know more about how Wikipedia has been working with the British Library. Many thanks.

Please change user name

This account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because your username, Taparchives, does not meet our username policy.

Your username is the only reason for this block. You are welcome to choose a new username (see below).

A username should not be promotional, related to a "real-world" group or organization, misleading, offensive, or disruptive. Also, usernames may not end in the word "bot" unless the account is an approved bot account.

You are encouraged to choose a new account name that meets our policy guidelines. Alternatively, if you have already made edits and you wish to keep your existing contributions under a new name, then you may request a change in username by:

Adding {{unblock-un|your new username here}} on your user talk page. You should be able to do this even though you are blocked, as you can usually still edit your own talk page. If not, you may wish to contact the blocking administrator by clicking on "E-mail this user" on their talk page.
At an administrator's discretion, you may be unblocked for 24 hours to file a request.
Please note that you may only request a name that is not already in use, so please check here for a listing of already taken names. The account is created upon acceptance, thus do not try to create the new account before making the request for a name change. For more information, please see Wikipedia:Changing username.

If you feel that you were blocked in error, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first.

Daniel Case (talk) 04:54, 2 August 2012 (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.

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

Requested username:

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

Decline reason:

Declined due to lack of response to the question below. Max Semenik (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Now that you know that you can't add links to your website, what else do you plan to do if unblocked? Max Semenik (talk) 10:55, 23 August 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

Hi Max Semenik, my apologies for not replying sooner. As I didn't realise there was a 4-day limit on responding to questions naturally I assumed that I could answer at my leisure. Contrary to your suggestion, I do not 'know' that I can't add links. Your colleague (Tim Riley) stated above that external links are allowed, as long as they are positioned under the correct heading. Has this changed? Furthermore, the website being linked to isn't mine. I contribute to it on behalf of the Victoria and Albert Museum. It is an academic resource offering free online access to a variety of UK archives. I would like clarification as to whether my request for a username change will be accepted, and following this, whether I'll be allowed to post links under "External links" or not. Many thanks.

Decline reason:

Links must still adhere to our policy on external links - generally, links to forums and other sites with user-generated content are not accepted, and the policy further states, "in line with Wikipedia policies, you should avoid linking to a site that you own, maintain, or represent—even if Wikipedia guidelines seem to imply that it may otherwise be linked.". Additionally, it appears as though your sole purpose here so far has been to advertise the content available on this website: "A full catalogue and details of access arrangements are available on [link]". If you could provide details of what other edits you would be interested in making, we can consider unblocking you. Hersfold non-admin^(t/a/c) 14:39, 7 September 2012 (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).

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

Request reason:

Thank you for your response. To clarify, I would not be interested in making any further edits. My sole intention was to add links to credible, reputable primary academic sources, for the free use of anyone who wished to know more on the individuals or institutions in question. I have listed below some of many links I have found on various active wikipedia pages, which seem to be doing the same thing without incurring blocks.

The Women's Library page provides a link to their own catalogues. Under the guidance given to me, wouldn't this constitute 'advertising' their own website?

The Edith How-Martyn page contains a link under its own specific 'Archives' heading directing users toward an external archive catalogue at the London Metropolitan University. I was told links should not be placed under their own headings. Apart from a formatting issue (I had originally used raw links rather than hiding them behind keywords) this kind of link was what I had hoped to add to various pages.

The John Gielgud, Ivor Novello and Ted Hughes pages all contain links to external archives held by a variety of reputable institutions.

The Harold Pinter Archive held at the British Library has its own page.

These examples are just a few I've come across. If you could advise me as to whether any of these formats would be a suitable way for me to contribute to wikipedia, I would be very grateful.

As far as I am aware, any link I would intend on adding would comply with your guidelines, specifically point 3 on your list of What can normally be linked:

Sites that contain neutral and accurate material that is relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject and cannot be integrated into the Wikipedia article due to copyright issues,[2] amount of detail (such as professional athlete statistics, movie or television credits, interview transcripts, or online textbooks), or other reasons.

Furthermore, referring to your message explaining the reason for my unblock request being rejected, I neither own, maintain or represent the website I would be linking to, it is not a forum and does not contain user-generated content.

As for your claim that I have merely been advertising, I feel as if this may be a purely semantic argument. If I were to add only a link to the website, as seen in some of the examples given above, would this work?

I am concerned that this further unblock request will result in my being prevented from editing my talk page. I certainly do not intend to be disruptive, I am simply eager to clarify this situation.

Decline reason:

No response from user, declining unblock. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:03, 13 September 2012 (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.

Hi there, we are of course interested in getting useful resources added to the encyclopedia. The problem is, not everyone's definition of "useful" is the same, and there is a danger that your edits create the appearance of promoting the organisation you work for (see WP:COI). Before unblocking your account, would you give me your assurance that, before placing any more external links on articles, that you will post on WP:ELN to gauge the support for these links and to get advice on how they should be formatted. Also, it would be advisable to request a new username (see WP:CHU) to avoid this issue coming up again. Regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:37, 12 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Martin and thank you for your response.

I would be happy to appeal to the WP:ELN forum, and would be grateful for any advice given. Indeed, this is all I have ever asked for. My intention was only ever to provide these links correctly, in a format which wikipedia was happy with. Unfortunately this seems to be difficult since I am yet to see any consistency within wikipedia regarding its stance on external links to archives.

A number of points worth mentioning; I would be happy to change my username, indeed I have already made one request to do so and was denied, I would also be happy to change the format of these links and will follow all and any advice given as to placement and wording etc. Also I would like to state, once again, that I do not work for or represent the site I will be adding links to. Furthermore, according to the COI page, users are not to write about "things unless you are certain that a neutral editor would agree that your edits improve Wikipedia." - I am certain that these links do indeed improve wikipedia and judging by the many examples of external links to archives I have provided above, many wikipedia editors seems to think so too.

While I'm here I should like to add that I am slightly incredulous that once again I seem to have had my request to be unblocked denied due to not having responded to your question 'in time'. I am responding now, a day later - surely this is timely enough? I am unaware of any time limit given for responding to wikipedia editors. Your colleague gave me four days, you've given me one. Perhaps if you absolutely require a response within a set time-frame in future it would be helpful if you mentioned this, to avoid this sort of back-and-forth.

I reiterate I would welcome any advice on how to constructively fix this problem!

I have unblocked your account. There is no time limit for responding, but we try to clear the unblock requests so that it contains just the active requests. Anyway I was watching your page, so there was no problem. Best regards — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 14:28, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Martin, thank you for your response. I am really pleased to finally get these issues resolved. I am still unsure as to placement however. There seem to be a number of places the links could go:

1. Under its own ==Archives== heading, as seen here

2. Under ==External links==, as seen here

3. Under an ===Archives=== sub-heading under the greater ==External links==, as seen here

4. When the link refers to the definitive archive of an individual/institution, can it have its own page, as seen here, or will one of the options apply?

Many thanks.

Username

Thinking about your username some more, I'm not sure that I understand the problem with it. It is not the name of any organisation or company. The connection between taparchives and archiveshub is tenuous, and you've already asserted that you have no link with that website anyway. So, perhaps it will not be necessary to change usernames ... — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 19:56, 13 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks again for resolving the issue of the username.

Per Martin's request, I have looked over the record to explain why I made the username block. The user had been adding links to the "Victoria and Albert Museum London, Department of Theatre and Performance." The last three words acronymize to "TAP", hence the block on the grounds that a specific organization was being promoted. Daniel Case (talk) 14:36, 14 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

In response to this I'd like to state, once again, that the links were all for pages at archiveshub.ac.uk. None of the links were for pages at the V&A website.