User talk:Mikewhawkins

Your submission at Articles for creation: Netizen Corporation (October 20)[edit]

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by SwisterTwister was:

This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies.

The comment the reviewer left was:

Considering everything here is overspecific about what the company would advertise itself about, and there's no actual convincing news sources; however, because this is only 3 years old, that would simply not be long enough to obtain the needed news substance for notability.

Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Netizen Corporation and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk or on the reviewer's talk page.
You can also use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

SwisterTwister talk 04:05, 20 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Netizen Corporation[edit]

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 Netizen Corporation requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about a company, corporation or organization, but it does not credibly indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

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. –Ammarpad (talk) 17:39, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your article[edit]

Please work on it in draft space and do not move it to mainspace yourself as you have a conflict of interest. You can find your draft here: Draft:Netizen Corporation. CHRISSYMAD ❯❯❯¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 19:54, 23 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018[edit]

There have been two problems with this account: the account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia, and your username indicates that the account represents a business or other organisation or group or a web site, which is also against policy, as an account must be for just one person. Because of those problems, the account has been blocked indefinitely from editing.

If you intend to make useful contributions about some topic other than your business or organisation, you may request an unblock. To do so, post the text {{unblock-spamun|Your proposed new username|Your reason here}} at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with a new username you are willing to use. See Special:CentralAuth 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 that reason, you must:

Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of 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}} at the bottom of your talk page, but you should read the guide to appealing blocks first. Orange Mike | Talk 03:40, 24 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to be unblocked to request a change in username has been reviewed by an administrator, who declined the request. Other administrators may also review this block, but should not override the decision without a good reason (see the blocking policy). Do not remove this unblock review while you are blocked.

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

Requested username:

netizenus (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log)

Request reason:

Am not being paid to promote anyone and did not intend to promote any organization

Decline reason:

As noted below, you'll need to pick a different username. Additionally, you are unlikely to be unblocked unless you agree to refrain from writing about the Netizen Corporation and tell us what you'll write about instead. Yamla (talk) 11:39, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

rename[edit]

I'm sorry, but "netizenus " is just another form of the company name. Please try something more unique and individual. Add the string of letters of your choice (other than "us" ) plus a preposition and that would suffice. Or any other alphanumeric combo by itself if it's not already taken. Dlohcierekim (talk) 02:08, 13 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

“Netizen” is my username on almost everything, it is even on my license plate. It precedes the company by over a decade.

As their is no connection, you should be able to write about other subjects. Please tell us what sort of edits you wish to make. Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I had never had any intention of causing any sort of unallowed promotion. Now I cannot use a handle that I have been using on every site for over a decade. Please change my username to simply mikewhawkins because I apparently can’t use the one I use everywhere else and is even on my license plate.

Decline reason:

The proposed new username is acceptable. However, the other elements of the block still need to be addressed. You will not be unblocked until:

you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to your organisation (requested edits will still be permitted)
you agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose your paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy
you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future

If you have no interest in editing Wikipedia beyond writing about your organisation, then you will not be unblocked. If this is the case, I recommend you consider alternative outlets. Yunshui ^雲 _水 07:31, 15 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Why did you decide to write about the Netizen Corporation? Did you realize that if that is your username that others would think that you work for them? 331dot (talk) 07:03, 14 July 2019 (UTC) Because I have seen others do the same thing without any issue whatsoever and "netizen" is an actual dictionary word. Only here, in my case, as a relatively novice user does this appear to be such a major issue. It was notable, given there are other companies with far less presence in the area that have coverage on here as well. I saw nothing wrong at the time given the lax policing of other such activities in the past I had seen.[reply]

globally renamed Usnetizen to Mikewhawkins[edit]

globally renamed Usnetizen to Mikewhawkins. Sorry for the aggravation. Someone else will review the unblock request. Dlohcierekim (talk) 03:02, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note this identifies the user as having a clear and blatant conflict of interest related to the Netizen Corporation. Not a surprise, of course. The user has not yet addressed these blatant violations. --Yamla (talk) 12:40, 14 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this a "blatant" violation and what are you talking about "not surprised" - why the hostility? I'm not understanding. Yamla's tone and response is not professional or helpful and is the reason so many people give up on even bothering to support this platform. What am I supposed to do here? Maybe propose a solution instead of just bashing users of the platform.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Mikewhawkins (talk • contribs)

You have implied you have no conflict of interest and your username is just a coincidence, predating the company by over a decade. This is misleading. You have a clear conflict of interest. If you are willing to have me disclose this exact conflict of interest, let me know. I'm not permitted to do so without your consent, due to WP:OUTING, though it's not hard to find. The solution, as has been repeatedly pointed out to you, is to fully and honestly disclose your conflict of interest, abide by WP:COI, and to agree not to write about your organisation, or any other subject matter for which you have a conflict of interest. Do what's required by policy, convince us there'll be no further violations, and tell us what you'll write about instead. --Yamla (talk) 16:59, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

I have changed my username and requested an unblock multiple times - what "violations" are there left? I had no intention of violating anything as I only did what I have seen multiple other experienced users doing in the past. I have no idea what else I am supposed to do. User Yamla's tone is disrespectful, unprofessional and unhelpful in clearing anything up and that sort of response is why so many people give up on this platform and have little respect for volunteer admins simply looking for a bit of authority that they can't get anywhere else. Please advise.

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. ST47 (talk) 03:54, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 were given a solution by Yunshui above. Please respond to those points and answer the questions I posed above. 331dot (talk) 16:55, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed *you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to your organisation (requested edits will still be permitted) Agreed *you agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose your paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy Geographical locations I have knowledge of in the PA, NJ and NY areas *you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future Satisfactory 331dot?

Also, Yamla - you have little idea what you are talking about, and that is "blatantly" obvious. You need to check your tone because that wouldn't fly on any other platform and is why the admins like you have a horrendous reputation amongst new users. You are doing nothing to help and just making it harder for people to actually contribute because they simply don't want to deal with people like you. Others here have been perfectly courteous.

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).

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

Request reason:

Agreed *you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to your organisation (requested edits will still be permitted) Agreed *you agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose your paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy Geographical locations I have firsthand knowledge of in the PA, NJ and NY areas, as in meaning that I have traveled to and will cite all appropriate sources for because I avidly read on associated topics *you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future

Decline reason:

Duplicate request. ST47 (talk) 03:54, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

I'm concerned about your "firsthand knowledge" comment - could you clarify your understanding of what are appropriate sources of information for writing articles on Wikipedia? stwalkerster (talk) 17:35, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Meaning that I have traveled to and will cite all appropriate sources for because I avidly read on associated topics, stwalkerster. So many wikipedia lawyers on here picking apart every little word. This is why novices don't use this platform and it relies so heavily on fundraising to stay afloat - overzealous, unpaid admins.

I've ignored your combative attitude here until now, but attacking those from whom you're asking for an unblock rarely works in your favour. I asked a simple question of you to confirm your understanding and whether or not I needed to point you in the direction of some help pages to improve your knowledge ahead of someone making a decision on whether or not to unblock you. You've responded by throwing barbs and making me think that you wouldn't do well at collaborative work, which is what a lot of Wikipedia editing is. I'm not going to review your unblock request, as based on the attacks you've issued on this page alone I would likely decline it, without even looking at the original block reason. Call it "wikipedia lawyering" if you want, but the simple matter is that we need to review whether or not you can be a productive, collaborative editor, and at the moment you're just giving us more reasons to think the answer to that is "no". stwalkerster (talk) 20:57, 18 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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).

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

Request reason:

Agreed *you agree to avoid creating or directly editing articles related to your organisation (requested edits will still be permitted) Agreed *you agree to abide by the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and disclose your paid relationship in accordance with the paid contributor policy Geographical locations I have firsthand knowledge of in the PA, NJ and NY areas, as in meaning that I have traveled to and will cite all appropriate sources for because I avidly read on associated topics *you indicate what areas of Wikipedia you intend to edit in the future

Decline reason:

Your combativeness in the last several unblock requests and discussion around them demonstrates that you are not here to work collaboratively and are unlikely to contribute constructively. Wikipedia is not your advertising platform. Due to your repeated personal attacks, I am removing your ability to post to this page. ST47 (talk) 03:54, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Additionally, this account is

Confirmed as IP socking.
— Berean Hunter (talk) 04:04, 20 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]