User talk:Tiffanynewcomb

Hello, Tiffanynewcomb, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions.

I notice that one of the first articles you edited appears to be dealing with a topic with which you may have a conflict of interest. In other words, you may find it difficult to write about that topic in a neutral and objective way, because you are, work for, or represent, the subject of that article. Your recent contributions may have already been reverted for this very reason.

To reduce the chances of deletion, you might like to draft your article before submission, then ask me or any other editor to proofread it. To start creating a draft article, just click your user name at the top of the screen when you are logged in, and edit that page as you would any other. If the page you created has already been deleted from Wikipedia, but you want to save the content from it to use for that draft, don't hesitate to ask anyone from this list and they will copy it to your user page.

The one firm rule we do have in connection with conflicts of interest is that accounts used by more than one person will unfortunately be blocked from editing. It is also worth noting that Wikipedia generally does not allow editors to have usernames which specifically link them to one company or corporation. If your username does have such a name, it would be advisable for you to request a change of username.

If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! You can also just type {{helpme}} on your user page, 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:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome!

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for spamming or advertising. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose. If you would like to be unblocked, you may appeal this block by adding below this notice the text {{unblock|Your reason here}}, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first.

--Orange Mike | Talk 20:46, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

On the basis of your saying "I will not repeat the violation again, and if I am reinstated, will only provide neutral, productive contributions to a variety of articles, on a variety of topics. Additionally, if reinstated, I will edit the Nuru International article to be neutral (including researching some articles with different/neutral/negative perspectives on their work)", and following a discussion (below) among several administrators, I am willing to give you another chance.

Request handled by: JamesBWatson (talk)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.

I believe that this request should be granted, but am requesting the opinion of the blocking admin first. This looks like a good faith newbie error. Sandstein 22:12, 28 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As long as Tiffany agrees to leave the Nuru article alone entirely. --Orange Mike | Talk 03:57, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In view of her statement above, I do not think that such a restriction is justifiable. Should her edits turn out to be spamming after all, we can always re-block this account. I'm turning the unblock request back on to get more input by other administrators. Sandstein 09:15, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Sandstein. The editor's first contribution has led to an indefinite block, and I think we can well afford to give another chance. I will not unblock yet, to allow more discussion if anyone has more to say, but I am much inclined to unblock. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:26, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(edit conflict) I agree with Sandstein, give this user another chance, and a chance to clean the article up (not blocking them from it entirely). - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 11:27, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

With three administrators in favour of simply unblocking and one in favour of unblocking with reservations I am prepared to go ahead and unblock. Welcome back, Tiffanynewcomb, and I hope you have a successful time as a Wikipedia editor, and that this unfortunate early experience can be put behind you. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:36, 29 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify, does this mean I can or cannot clean the Nuru article? I am happy to take the time to edit and clean it, or to leave it alone and let the Wikipedia community do so. I just want to be clear so I don't get blocked again. Thanks. Tiffanynewcomb (talk) 02:06, 30 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As I see it, you're free toe edit that page. The issue is you staying with-in our guidelines/policies, specifically WP:SPAM, not that you are editing certain pages. You are expected to do this on all pages, including the Nuru article. If you can cleanup the Nuru article, there is no problem with that. If you continue to add "spammy" content, the block may be reinstated. - Kingpin¹³ (talk) 01:36, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]