User talk:DylRicho: Difference between revisions

Bla bla bla...

Replaceable fair use File:BlackBerry Porsche Design P9981.jpg

Thanks for uploading File:BlackBerry Porsche Design P9981.jpg. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:

1. Go to the media description page and edit it to add {{di-replaceable fair use disputed}}, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
2. On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Fut.Perf. ☼ 06:23, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

July 2012

Please stop adding inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to HTC One S. 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. Biker Biker (talk) 13:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Hello, DylRicho. We welcome your contributions to Wikipedia, but if you are affiliated with some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest or close connection to the subject.

All editors are required to comply with Wikipedia's neutral point of view content policy. People who are very close to a subject often have a distorted view of it, which may cause them to inadvertently edit in ways that make the article either too flattering or too disparaging. People with a close connection to a subject are not absolutely prohibited from editing about that subject, but they need to be especially careful about ensuring their edits are verified by reliable sources and writing with as little bias as possible.

If you are very close to a subject, here are some ways you can reduce the risk of problems:

• Avoid or exercise great caution when editing or creating articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with.
• Be cautious about deletion discussions. Everyone is welcome to provide information about independent sources in deletion discussions, but avoid advocating for deletion of articles about your competitors.
• Avoid linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam).
• Exercise great caution so that you do not accidentally breach Wikipedia's content policies.

Please familiarize yourself with relevant content policies and guidelines, especially those pertaining to neutral point of view, verifiability of information, and autobiographies.

For information on how to contribute to Wikipedia when you have a conflict of interest, please see our frequently asked questions for organizations. Thank you. Biker Biker (talk) 13:08, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Username blocked

Your account has been blocked indefinitely from editing Wikipedia because it appears to be mainly intended for publicity and/or promotional purposes. Please read the following carefully.

Why can't I edit Wikipedia?

Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, celebrity or other well-known individual, or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity. The edits may have violated one or more of our rules on spamming, which include: adding inappropriate external links, posting advertisements, and using Wikipedia for promotion. Wikipedia has many articles on companies, groups, and organizations, but such groups are generally discouraged from using Wikipedia to write about themselves. In addition, usernames like yours are disallowed under our username policy.

Am I allowed to make these edits if I change my username?

Probably not. See WP:FAQ/Organizations for a helpful list of frequently asked questions by people in your position. Also, review the conflict of interest guidance to see the kinds of limitations you would have to obey if you did want to continue editing about your company, group, organization, or clients. If this does not fit in with your goals, then you will not be allowed to edit again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

What can I do now?

If you have no interest in writing about some other topic than your organization, group, company, or product, you will probably not be allowed to edit Wikipedia again. Consider using one of the many websites that allow this instead.

If you do intend to make useful contributions about some other topic, you must convince a Wikipedia administrator that you mean it. To that end, please do the following:

• Add the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} on your user talk page.
• Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:Listusers 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 this reason, you must:

• Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the 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 by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 20:07, 15 July 2012 (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).

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

---

Request reason:

How is providing links to external sources for a phone such as its specifications and a review, a violation of your so-called inappropriate links? It's adding reliable sources to the article... Dylan (talk) 1:09 pm, Today (UTC−5)

Decline reason:

User:Biker Biker below explains it rather well. "Linking to specifications" is not the problem. The problem is using Wikipedia to drive traffic to what is, to judge from your username, your own website. As the block template states, "Your account's edits and/or username indicate that it is being used on behalf of a company, group, celebrity or other well-known individual, or organization for purposes of promotion and/or publicity." - Vianello (Talk) 18:47, 16 July 2012 (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.

How is it a violation? Read WP:ELNO. Also read WP:COI. Pushing in appropriate links is wrong, pushing inappropriate links on your own website is doubly wrong. --Biker Biker (talk) 18:19, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

An inappropriate link? I see many other people do that. What's so bad about linking to specs of the device and a review? Dylan (talk) 18:34, 16 July 2012 (UTC)}}

So you're saying my sources are unreliable? I own the damn phone. I've carried out tests and I have screenshots to prove it. Dylan(talk) 21:42, 16 July 2012 (UTC)}}

This user is asking that his block be reviewed:

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

---

Request reason:

I deem it unnecessary to block me from editing articles. I have been a member of Wikipedia since 2007 and if you take a look at my edit history, how many times do you see me "spamming"? I was simply adding in links to the phone because I own it. I have carried out a series of tests and I thought adding them to the article would build up on the informative material. The specifications that I linked to on my site are just that. There was never any intention of spamming or doing harm to Wikipedia or its articles with my account. I think I also included a reference to a review of the One S? Well I take blame for that as the review is an upcoming piece of work and is actually not yet up on my site.

Notes:

• In some cases, you may not in fact be blocked, or your block has already expired. Please check the list of active blocks. If no block is listed, then you have been autoblocked by the automated anti-vandalism systems. Please remove this request and follow these instructions instead for quick attention by an administrator.
• Please read our guide to appealing blocks to make sure that your unblock request will help your case. You may change your request at any time.

Administrator use only:

If you ask the blocking administrator to comment on this request, replace this template with the following, replacing "blocking administrator" with the name of the blocking admin:

{{Unblock on hold |1=blocking administrator |2=I deem it unnecessary to block me from editing articles. I have been a member of Wikipedia since 2007 and if you take a look at my edit history, how many times do you see me "spamming"? I was simply adding in links to the phone because I own it. I have carried out a series of tests and I thought adding them to the article would build up on the informative material. The specifications that I linked to on my site are just that. There was never any intention of spamming or doing harm to Wikipedia or its articles with my account. I think I also included a reference to a review of the One S? Well I take blame for that as the review is an upcoming piece of work and is actually not yet up on my site. |3 = ~~~~}}

If you decline the unblock request, replace this template with the following code, substituting {{subst:Decline reason here}} with a specific rationale. Leaving the decline reason unchanged will result in display of a default reason, explaining why the request was declined.

{{unblock reviewed |1=I deem it unnecessary to block me from editing articles. I have been a member of Wikipedia since 2007 and if you take a look at my edit history, how many times do you see me "spamming"? I was simply adding in links to the phone because I own it. I have carried out a series of tests and I thought adding them to the article would build up on the informative material. The specifications that I linked to on my site are just that. There was never any intention of spamming or doing harm to Wikipedia or its articles with my account. I think I also included a reference to a review of the One S? Well I take blame for that as the review is an upcoming piece of work and is actually not yet up on my site. |decline = {{subst:Decline reason here}} ~~~~}}

If you accept the unblock request, replace this template with the following, substituting Accept reason here with your rationale:

{{unblock reviewed |1=I deem it unnecessary to block me from editing articles. I have been a member of Wikipedia since 2007 and if you take a look at my edit history, how many times do you see me "spamming"? I was simply adding in links to the phone because I own it. I have carried out a series of tests and I thought adding them to the article would build up on the informative material. The specifications that I linked to on my site are just that. There was never any intention of spamming or doing harm to Wikipedia or its articles with my account. I think I also included a reference to a review of the One S? Well I take blame for that as the review is an upcoming piece of work and is actually not yet up on my site. |accept = accept reason here ~~~~}}