Please do not add advertising or inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did in Counterfeit consumer goods. Wikipedia is not a mere directory of links nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that exist to attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam policies for further explanations of links that are considered appropriate. If you feel the link should be added to the article, then please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. See the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. NawlinWiki (talk) 23:24, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia. It is considered spamming and Wikipedia is not a vehicle for advertising or promotion. Because Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, additions of links to Wikipedia will not alter search engine rankings. If you continue spamming, you may be blocked from editing Wikipedia. 24.4.101.72 (talk) 00:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
June 2010 edit
This is your final warning. You will be blocked from editing the next time you add inappropriate external links, as you did with this edit to Epedigree. Tommy2010 [message] 01:00, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
{{unblock|Your reason here}} below, but you should read our guide to appealing blocks first. Floquenbeam (talk) 01:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Fakestop (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have been blocked because it has been claimed I have used external links in my contributions. I have not used any external links so I am not sure why this has been claimed.
Decline reason:
You were blocked for repeatedly inserting the same advertising blurb into articles. This is not allowed, as Wikipedia is a neutrally written encyclopedia and does not accept advertising. TNXMan 01:51, 11 June 2010 (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.
Fakestop (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
oh ok sorry for that yesterday was my first day on wikipedia...I won't insert the same blurb again
Decline reason:
You failed to acknowledge valid warnings from other editors - this is a community. Saying that you won't "insert the same blurb" is not comforting: this suggests that you do not understand that the behaviour is incorrect for an encyclopedia. You will need to convince admins that you understand the policies, and will not break the policies as a whole in in the future (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 09:22, 11 June 2010 (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.
What do you plan to edit if unblocked? Toddst1 (talk) 09:09, 11 June 2010 (UTC)
Fakestop (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
as i made the edits all at the same time and being new to wikipedia I did not see any warnings from administrators before my edits were blocked as i did not check my messages...during my edits i received one warning not to use an external link and i removed the external link...i did not intend to breach any wikipedia rules...i hope to contribute in respect of newly developed anti-counterfeiting technology if unblocked
Decline reason:
Sorry, those really are the wrong answers. You were blocked for adding advertising material to articles; your username is the same as the name of the commercial product you were advertising; and you want to go back to adding material about "newly developed anti-counterfeiting technology", i.e., the same commercial product. Frankly, even if you were unblocked, it is likely that it would be on the conditions that you restrict yourself from any contributions in precisely that topic area and that you change your username immediately because it violates our advertising policy. All things considered, I'm sorry, it seems entirely possible that all you want to do here is advertise your product. Accounting4Taste:talk 22:33, 11 June 2010 (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.
Fakestop (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
if no one can talk about "newly developed anti-counterfeiting technology" why does it say on the Giesecke & Devrient page "In November 2009 Giesecke & Devrient announced plans to form a new company with SAP AG and Nokia Corp., named Original1, to deliver product authentication and anti-counterfeiting services globally. Its headquarters will be in Frankfurt, Germany. Original1 will offer of security solutions for the entire value chain, including user authentication, end-to-end encryption of the information flow and database encryption. [9]" ...are you saying this should be removed???...there are millions of examples like this on wikipedia...are you going to remove all edits like this? i think the point is there should not be blatant advertising but discussion of technolgical advances should be allowed...if such discussion is prohibited wikipedia can never update itself on scientific or technological advances made by any commercial organisation...this is surely not the outcome you are looking for...unless you want wikipedia to live in the stone age
Decline reason:
This doesn't address the reasons for the block. Adding relevant information cited to a reliable source is not the same as inserting material merely intended to promote a new product. "Discussion of technological advances" is, in a sense disallowed, as Wikipedia is not the place for original research. When a subject has received sufficient coverage in such sources to be considered notable and relevant for inclusion, it can be written about here in a neutral fashion. The same goes for your product. decltype (talk) 23:40, 11 June 2010 (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.
Fakestop (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
is the giescke and devrient edit cited above going to also be removed and the account holder blocked and if not why not? they are talking about an anti-counterfeiting yet to be developed! by your logic it is also promoting a new product
Decline reason:
This template is not to be used to argue content. As this is your fifth request that has been declined, I've disabled your ability to edit this page. Further requests should be through e-mail (unblock-en-l@lists.wikimedia.org). Kuru (talk) 00:03, 12 June 2010 (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.