User talk:ZaMediaGuy

January 2020

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. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 18:22, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Collapse duplicate unblock request—user has been renamed from Cnbcafrica to ZaMediaGuy per below. Mz7 (talk) 22:36, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]
{{unblock-spamun\|ZaMediaGuy\|I'm not being paid to make edits. My COI is that I work for CNBC Africa. The updates I made were verifiable, true and not promotional}}

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).

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

Request reason:

I'm not being paid to make edits. My COI is that I work for CNBC Africa. The updates I made were verifiable, true and not promotional, purely a statement of facts.

Decline reason:

As explained below you are a paid editor. PhilKnight (talk) 12:44, 15 January 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.

If you work for the company and are making edits relating to it, you are a paid editor. What is your connection to? Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:08, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know who is. Have you seen the edits? How is adding the founders of the tv network promotional or incorrect in any way? Have you reviewed the citation? Would you prefer I include a conflict of interest declaration?

globally renamed to ZaMediaGuy

globally renamed to ZaMediaGuy-- Deep fried okra 20:07, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sockpuppet investigation

An editor has opened an investigation into sockpuppetry by you. Sockpuppetry is the use of more than one Wikipedia account in a manner that contravenes community policy. The investigation is being held at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/ZaMediaGuy, where the editor who opened the investigation has presented their evidence. Please make sure you make yourself familiar with the guide to responding to investigations, and then feel free to offer your own evidence or to submit comments that you wish to be considered by the Wikipedia administrator who decides the result of the investigation. If you have been using multiple accounts (in a manner contrary to Wikipedia policy), please go to the investigation page and verify that now. Leniency is usually shown to those who promise not to do so again, or who did so unwittingly, but the abuse of multiple accounts is taken very seriously by the Wikipedia community.

Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 20:33, 14 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

{{unblock}}

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).

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

Request reason:

I will not repeat the mistake - sockpuppet + conflict of interest editing. Example of making a request using talk pages = https://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/Talk:CNBC_Africa ZaMediaGuy ZaMediaGuy (talk) 09:59, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Your example is you editing logged out which isn't allowed. I suggest you take the standard offer approach to being unblocked which is to wait 6 months without editing logged out or using socks. PhilKnight (talk) 12:44, 15 January 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.

Your email

Hi! I've read the email you sent me. It doesn't say anything that could not be said here on this page, so I'm not going to reply to it via mail. I hope that you have by now understood that you crossed a number of lines – editing as an IP while your account was blocked being just one of them. If you think I have made any mistake in relation to you or your edits you can of course freely say so here. In the circumstances it is not going to be at all easy for you to be unblocked, and the standard offer suggested above may indeed be your best option. If you do choose to make another unblock request, please make sure that it is one single request only. As I said above, you'll need to 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 (I see some progress in that direction), and also describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked – i.e., the articles where you think you might make a useful contribution, but which are not connected with your employer or the people that own that company or any other companies they may own etc. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 19:20, 15 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My Reply

Justlettersandnumbers Thank you for taking time to respond. I was beginning to think you had something personal against me. Firstly, let me apologize for not following the rules. As a newbie to wiki editing, I was not aware of the conflict of interest rules. Since the block, I have taken time out to read and review the policies and will make sure I declare my COI's once my account is back up in 6 months. I will use the talk pages to request edits if I have a COI.
You should know that there are other people, besides myself, that will be requesting edits - as you may have seen on other pages, there are factual errors on the pages I tried to edit. These people are not sock-puppets.

You should have talked to me before taking the drastic step of blocking me, I would have complied. No matter. This has been a learning experience.

Since my account is blocked and my devices are blacklisted, I have no choice but to make this update logged out. 41.193.164.148 (talk) 06:45, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, yes, maybe I would not have blocked your account if we had had this conversation first, but when we see a user with a corporate username making corporate edits, our practice is to block immediately; please understand that we are completely overrun with editing of this kind, and that some see it as a threat to our reputation for impartiality, and to whatever reputation for reliability we've managed to acquire. It's unfortunate that your access is blocked, that will be because you edited while logged out; I think it will clear in a few days. Please, whatever you do, do not make any further logged-out edits – it will delay your option to ask for a clean start (the six-month waiting period starts from when previous unacceptable edits ceased), and may permanently prejudice your chances of it being approved. If you want to make an unblock request and can't access your talk-page while logged in, you can use the Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System (there's a link to start a request on that page). Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 16:31, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Justlettersandnumbers Thanks for the advice, I understand the importance of maintaining credibility and so no hard feelings. See you in 6 months then.ZaMediaGuy (talk) 17:57, 16 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]