Shirin.berkeley

Script Encoding Initiative

Information you added about the Script Encoding Initiative seems to be self promotion (since supporters of other Unicode proposals aren't listed). In any case, it is better placed in the Unicode block articles or at least the Unicode section (like Gondi writing) rather than the articles on scripts themselves... Provided it doesn't duplicate existing citations. Also, I'd use the author (first/last) parameters of the citation template instead of "was written by ... this is the link to" within a citation or external link. DRMcCreedy (talk) 06:37, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

I agree that proposal links would be better placed in the corresponding Unicode block articles, and it would be a good long-term goal to list all the proposal documents that feed into each Unicode block, but it is doubtful that we need to mention SEI as it does not matter how a proposal was funded but only that it exists. Anyway, your help in this is appreciated, but you should be extremely careful about putting external links to SEI into Wikipedia articles, as this will be seen as self-promotion, conflict of interest, and link-spamming (please read WP:COI to better understand Wikipedia policies on this). You should be aware that if it seems that you are only here to promote SEI or if you keep on reverting other editors' reverts of your additions then you will certainly get blocked sooner rather than later (which is not what we want). BabelStone (talk) 23:21, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

You have been blocked from editing for a period of 3 days for advertising or self-promoting in violation of the conflict of interest and notability guidelines. Once the block has expired, you are welcome to make useful contributions. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  DMacks (talk) 02:31, 4 September 2016 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

I should be unblocked because this is not self-promotion. I am providing new links to script proposals for these different languages. The final script proposals provide crucial information for these different languages. Furthermore, links to the Script Encoding Initiative are to allow readers to use the website to learn more information about the script and to also show that SEI had support from other individuals with creating and researching script proposals. This block is completely unwarranted and I am simply trying to allow readers to gain a better understanding of the language by providing them with a proper link to the proposal.

Decline reason:

It's totally inappropriate to spam the same link to page after page after page. You have caused substantial damage to the Wikipedia. If you continue once your block expires, you'll find yourself blocked indefinitely and the link itself may be blacklisted. I encourage you to read the above discussion and our various policies. Yamla (talk) 12:17, 5 September 2016 (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.

-Shirin.berkeley

September 2016

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for continuing the same actions that led to your block after being told you would be blocked again.. If you think there are good reasons why you should be unblocked, you may appeal this block by first reading the guide to appealing blocks, then adding the following text to the bottom of your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}.  Doug Weller talk 11:06, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

ArbCom Elections 2016: Voting now open!

Hello, Shirin.berkeley. Voting in the 2016 Arbitration Committee elections is open from Monday, 00:00, 21 November through Sunday, 23:59, 4 December to all unblocked users who have registered an account before Wednesday, 00:00, 28 October 2016 and have made at least 150 mainspace edits before Sunday, 00:00, 1 November 2016.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2016 election, please review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:08, 21 November 2016 (UTC)