Emma7231

November 2017

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to Internet fax. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Dawnseeker2000 12:44, 5 November 2017 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of FAX.PLUS

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on FAX.PLUS, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic. Please read the guidelines on spam and Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations for more information.

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. Largoplazo (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

October 2018

Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia, as you did to FAX.PLUS. While objective prose about beliefs, organisations, people, products or services is acceptable, Wikipedia is not intended to be a vehicle for soapboxing, advertising or promotion. Thank you. Largoplazo (talk) 15:15, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Acroterion (talk) 15:23, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

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).

Emma7231 (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

---

Request reason:

Your reason here: I was just providing an overview of a service provided by a legit company. The content is not promotional and every part of the article has been linked to a reliable source. There are so many other pages with the same type of content including Mailjet, Gmelius, and Hellosign. I would really appreciate it if you could unblock me and let me know about the parts of the article that you believe is promotional. I will edit those parts to make sure there are no promotional text and all the content is just informational and non-promotional. Thanks.

Decline reason:

This request demonstrates that you do not understand Wikipedia's standards of reliability of sources and that, even in retrospect, you are unable to see how your content was inappropriate. Thus it's better to leave you blocked. Huon (talk) 17:51, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

---

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.

Those articles have problems and should be edited or deleted accordingly. I'm going to review them. See WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. The article you created was an ad through and through. In addition, it lacked any indication that the business might be of encyclopedic significance. Further, the block is about that as well as your ongoing use of Wikipedia to link to their website. Largoplazo (talk) 15:40, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

Hello, I know this is frustrating, but I cannot see unblocking you unless you affirm that you will not edit about Faxplus or link to Faxplus on other pages. If you have not done so, you should probably read and heed WP:COI and WP:PAID. My impression is that you need to follow the instructions at WP:PAID. You should probably find some other subject among Wikipedia's 5 million articles to edit about/ Please see WP:Community portal for lists of articles in need of attention. Any other admin can unblock as they see fit, but this is how I see it.-- Dlohcierekim (talk) 16:26, 14 October 2018 (UTC)

For the record, I've submitted two of the three articles mentioned for deletion discussions, and cleaned out the third, based on promotional content, mostly associated with conflicts of interest, and existence of applicable sources. Largoplazo (talk) 19:02, 14 October 2018 (UTC)