Sumeysh
September 2018
edit
Please do not add promotional material to Wikipedia. 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. MBlaze Lightning 16:23, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
{{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 05:47, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Sumeysh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I do not understand how what I have added to Wikipedia can be considered as spam. As a practicing lawyer, I know that it is very important for people to have practical information on different laws and how they function. That is missing in almost all articles on Wikipedia which focus on Indian Laws. The information present is full of legalese and technical information, which is not accessible or understandable for anyone who is not a lawyer. Please ask a person who is qualified to review what I have uploaded to check this. I can understand how this can come across as spam to someone who does not understand how laws function and the challenges non-lawyers face in understanding legal text. As for the charge of promotion, I have been sharing links to one resource because there is only one resource in India which is currently explaining Indian laws. Please understand this distinction. There are various sources and website where once can read legal text of laws in India, there is only one resource, which is explaining Indian law for non-lawyers. That is the resource I have been sharing. If you can find any other resource suitable for this purpose, please apprise me of the same Sumeysh (talk) 08:41, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
You have neglected to address the fact that you work for the organization whose website you have been spamming. Yunshui 雲水 10:59, 7 September 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.
Sumeysh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Agreed, but how does that affect the relevance of the content? Is the content not helpful? Is it not adding to the quality of the Wikipedia article? Is it not helping people who are coming on to Wikipedia to understand how the law functions? I don't understand how this is an issue as long as it is helping to improve the quality of content available on Wikipedia. It's not like I am blindly dumping content on Wikipedia, I am adding only limited information from the website which adds to the article. If that is the only issue, then I am willing to add multiple sources for the information I shareSumeysh (talk) 11:48, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
This is considered undisclosed paid editing, and it is not allowed, period. You agree that you have this conflict of interest as well. If you were to be unblocked, one provision would be that you do not edit about your company, or items related to your company again. RickinBaltimore (talk) 13:04, 7 September 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.
Sumeysh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
Additionally, while I agree that I am in the wrong here, I don't understand how this qualifies as vandalism? Also the fact that the IP address I am using is blocked and when anyone at my workplace tries to make a wikipedia account, they are informed that the IP address is blocked due to vandalism by Sumeysh is quite unfair. While I do beelieve that I am definitely in the wrong here, terming it as vandalism and displaying the same publicly is unfair and slightly capricious Sumeysh (talk) 05:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
I find it very difficult to believe that you weren't aware that adding links to your website to multiple articles would be promoting your website - that is, spamming Wikipedia. Furthermore, the content you added was copy-pasted from the website and is not released under a license compatible with Wikipedia's, so you violated Wikipedia's copyright policy. Even if there were no copyright issue, what you copy-pasted is clearly unsuitable in tone and content for an encyclopedia. Since adding that content, preferably with links to your website, seems to be your only purpose on Wikipedia, it's better to leave you blocked. The good news is that you don't need to remove anything since other editors have already cleaned up again. Huon (talk) 19:03, 12 September 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.
Sumeysh (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))
Request reason:
I have already apologized for the same. If you want to conclude that I only want to use wikipedia for spamming then you are welcome to that assumption. Please don't unblock me if you don't wish to. I have already acknowledged my mistake and apologized multiple times. If that is not enough, then that's great then.Sumeysh (talk) 06:18, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
Decline reason:
No answer to Huon in over a week. I think the crux of the issue was that the autoblocker was hitting co-workers at your office, due to sharing an IP. Not logging in or attempting to edit from your office is/was enough to solve this, as confirmed below. SQLQuery me! 18:40, 30 September 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.
- You don't need to make multiple unblock requests for new comments, so I have merged the two. Regarding the "vandalism" thing, you are not blocked for or accused of vandalism - the message given to the IP will be some sort of generic one. Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 06:47, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
But that is what is happening! Anyone who is using the same IP address, if they try to create a wikipedia account, it says this IP address has been blocked because of vandalism, and with my name on it. This is really unfair, I am not a Vandal!
- What does the message say, specifically? Can you copy it here please? (But leave out the IP address if you wish to keep it confidential). Boing! said Zebedee (talk) 07:46, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
Just asked someone to check, no message showing now. They can log-in. The IP block seems to have been removed. Thanks to whoever did this. I don't mind being called a spammer, but when people in my office are getting a message that I have been vandalizing wikipedia pages, which is why our IP address is blocked, that's a problem
- I will let another admin review the new unblock request, but I'm sorely tempted to decline it with exactly the same rationale again. In the unblock request that I answered, you spend most of the space (excepting the "vandalism" issue which by the time of my review seemed resolved) asking just how many links to your website, and how much content copy-pasted from that website, can remain. What was I to conclude from that, if not that your only purpose on Wikipedia is to add that content and those links? And "Please don't unblock me if you don't wish to" - OK, done, you're welcome. If you do want to get unblocked, I suggest you explain what we can expect from you other than adding copyright violations and linkspam. Huon (talk) 18:38, 14 September 2018 (UTC)