User talk:Tevearar

Tevearar, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Tevearar! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia.
Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like John from Idegon (talk).

Visit the Teahouse

We hope to see you there!

Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts

16:04, 25 January 2019 (UTC)

February 2019

You have been blocked indefinitely from editing for advertising or promotion. From your contributions, this seems to be your only purpose.

If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page: {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}}. MER-C 11:16, 9 February 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).

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

Request reason:

Hello. Oh no... How can I submit the Draft? What I have to do? Tevearar (talk) 11:28, 9 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

I am declining your unblock request because it does not address the reason for your block, or because it is inadequate for other reasons. To be unblocked, you must convince the reviewing administrator(s) that

the block is not necessary to prevent damage or disruption to Wikipedia, or
the block is no longer necessary because you
1. understand what you have been blocked for,
2. will not continue to cause damage or disruption, and
3. will make useful contributions instead.

Please read the guide to appealing blocks for more information. Yamla (talk) 11:53, 9 February 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.

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).

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

Request reason:

Hello. I understand the reason for my block, I will never cause damage or disruption again on Wikipedia, like I did with moving a page without using the Article for Creation... Please give me a last chance to make good and useful contributions instead. I'm sorry. --Tevearar (talk) 14:17, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Decline reason:

Procedural decline; user is unresponsive after a week. You are welcome to make a new request if it addresses the concerns given. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 20 February 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.

Now that you have agreed not to write about Pierre-Pascal Urbon or anything else for which you have a conflict of interest, what will you be writing about instead? --Yamla (talk) 14:36, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would first start contribute to Wikipedia. F. e. I would pick a topic like Switzerland–United Kingdom relations and expand it with significant coverage. Second - I would submit Pierre-Pascal Urbon into Articles for Creation - this should be allowed - even for people with a strong conflict of interest (which I think - I don't have..) --Tevearar (talk) 15:12, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can you explain your exact relationship to Pierre-Pascal Urbon and SMA Solar Technology, and how you were able to obtain a press photo of him licensed under CC-BY-SA-4.0? Can you also explain why you are so focused on Pierre-Pascal Urbon, given there are literally millions of other articles for you to edit, articles for which you would clearly not have a conflict of interest? --Yamla (talk) 15:35, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

He's a friend of mine and he gave me the picture. I'm a freelancer (back-end-developer) and I was like "Let's try to write some wiki-code". SMA Solar is his old company.. he left it. --Tevearar (talk) 15:44, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Right, so you do have a conflict of interest. I suggest you commit to not writing about him and not writing about any other subject area for which you have a conflict. If you make that commitment, you are much more likely to be unblocked. Note that your unblock request will be reviewed by a different admin either way, though, so you certainly aren't forced to agree to this. I just suggest there's no reasonable possibility you'll be unblocked otherwise (but again, not my call). --Yamla (talk) 15:48, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a Friend of Pierre-Pascal Urbon - and I will also will notice this on my user page / in the article (I think discussion page, right?) can you notice this? I just want to submit the article (Articles for Creation) - and I want to make good / useful edits in other areas of Wiki.. --Tevearar (talk) 16:05, 12 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Much as Yamla states, I would only be willing to unblock if you agree to not edit about this individual or anything within your conflict of interest. That would not necessarily be forever, but you would need to develop a decent edit/article creation history first. As he stated, you do not have to agree, but that's my condition. 331dot (talk) 17:19, 12 February 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).

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

Request reason:

Hey. I understand the reason for my block, I will never cause damage or disruption again on Wikipedia, like I did with moving a page without using the Article for Creation... Please give me a last chance to make good and useful contributions instead. I'm sorry.

Decline reason:

Procedural decline only; this request has been open for some time but has not persuaded someone to address it. You are welcome to make a new request that is more persuasive and/or accepts the terms suggested to you. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 16 March 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.

...

Hey 331dot Ok. I will develop a decent edit/article creation history first. That means at least 50 good edits. Fine? If something goes wrong you can block me infinite ... --Tevearar (talk) 10:25, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I would want you to not edit in the area of your conflict of interest for at least six months, after which you could appeal to WP:COIN or WP:AN to be permitted to use edit requests and Articles for Creation. And this is assuming MER-C has no objections. 331dot (talk) 10:38, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

6 months? I mean... I just submit a draft and improve it if needed. That's it. Maybe it will be rejected. 6 months feel way too long.. I just moved a page. That's the mistake i did. I'm sorry... but that feels not fair. :/ --Tevearar (talk) 10:49, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I won't close this in case other administrators feel differently, but those are my conditions. You are free to try to get a better deal from someone else if you want. 331dot (talk) 10:55, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Other admins? :( --Tevearar (talk) 11:03, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, administrators are the only ones who can lift (or impose) blocks. 331dot (talk) 11:05, 23 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Block evasion

This user has engaged in block evasion as of May, 2019. --Yamla (talk) 00:30, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]