User talk:Einsiders

Welcome!

Hello, Einsiders, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Unfortunately, one or more of the pages you created, like Clayton Hill, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines for page creation, and may soon be deleted.

There's a page about creating articles you may want to read called Your first article. If you are stuck, and looking for help, please come to the New contributors' help page, where experienced Wikipedians can answer any queries you have! Or, you can just type {{helpme}} on this page, and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Here are a few other good links for newcomers:

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you have any questions, check out Wikipedia:Where to ask a question or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Teapotgeorge^Talk 16:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Clayton Hill[edit]

A tag has been placed on Clayton Hill 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 person or group of people, but it does not 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 see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable, as well as our subject-specific notability guideline for biographies.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Lastly, please note that if the page does get deleted, you can contact one of these admins to request that they userfy the page or have a copy emailed to you. Teapotgeorge^Talk 16:06, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Username policy violation[edit]

Thank you for your interest in editing Wikipedia. Our policies prohibit the use of user names that appear to represent or promote a company, group, other organization or a product, and as a result your account has been blocked from editing. If you wish to continue editing, please consider reviewing our username policy more thoroughly and then creating a new account. If you feel this block was made in error, you may ask for a review of this username block by adding the text {{unblock|Your reason here}} below this message. Thank you, Shereth 20:35, 28 July 2009 (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.

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

Requested username:

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

Decline reason:

Three days without a response to the question below. — Daniel Case (talk) 15:02, 31 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What do you plan to do on Wikipedia, other than promote einsiders.com? --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 22:20, 28 July 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I have taken over the EInsiders account from Rusty White who has literally thousands of references to our obituaries. It is my understanding that Wiki considers EInsiders.com a news organization like Washington Post, Variety, etc and has EInsiders registered as an approved reference under the letters EI . Our obituaries are verified and referenced back to the individual's who have died Wiki page. That is the context that I am posting - to put the link to the obituaries to the person's wiki page. Please let me know if we can continue to do this as we have done for years.

Decline reason:

If this account it not being operated by its original owner, it cannot be unblocked for any reason. Wikipedia accounts cannot be shared under any circumstances. Similarly, Wikipedia does not allow "role accounts" for use by groups or organizations.

If you are affiliated with EInsiders.com, it is touchy to go around posting links without further review. The best thing is to suggest those links on article talk pages. This way, Wikipedia can maintain its integrity, but the material will get into the articles where appropriate and relevant. Mango juice^talk 19:57, 12 August 2009 (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.

Thank you for your response. I have discussed this matter with our long-term company President and author, Jonathan W. Hickman who has been extensively quoted on Wiki over the years. In my zeal to participate in your wonderful web resource, it appears that you misunderstand my intent to share our valuable obituary content (as has been done for years on Wiki). It only makes sense that as a valued source to Wiki over the years, that EInsiders.com would have its own entry on Wiki - that has now been deleted along with my recent posts. We would be happy to supply a corporate bio and information in order to effectuate that. If, on the other hand, you don't think such a thing is appropriate, we may need to discuss this matter your superiors in order to resolve this disput. Obviously, Wiki is valuable to us but the great amount of EInsiders.com content already present on Wiki has been valuable to Wiki. I look forward to your prompt response.

If an editor uninvolved with EInsiders.com finds it suitable to create an article about EInsiders.com, then an article will be created. However, nobody is allowed to create articles about themselves or their businesses on Wikipedia. --jpgordon^{::==( o )} 03:54, 14 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

How would it be accurate if it wasn't supplied by EInsiders? Otherwise, it would be unverified gossip. I point to another company that is similar to us - Rotten Tomatoes. Rotten Tomatoes has a very extensive Wiki page with a substantial amount of corporate information. Most, if not all of it would have to have been supplied by Rotten Tomatoes. EInsiders has been in existence longer than Rotten Tomatoes and we have shared EInsiders content with Wiki on a regular basis. There are two points that need to be clarified. The first is if EInsiders content is being used extensively on Wiki - as it has been for years - shouldn't there be a page telling who and what EInsiders is? The second is the fact that Wiki is extensively using EInsiders content and now Wiki is not letting us cite our own content. We can not let Wiki use our content without an EInsiders cite.

If EInsiders is worth including on Wikipedia, it will be because there are multiple independent, reliable sources giving information about EInsiders. If that's not the case, an article is inappropriate. So either others can write the article, or the article is not appropriate for inclusion in the first place. Please review Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations and Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. See WP:BESTCOI for the kind of behavior you would be expected to abide by if unblocked. See WP:CORP and Wikipedia:Notability for information on Wikipedia's inclusion standards. Mango juice^talk 03:59, 15 August 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

So, I guess the question #1 is are you going to unblock me and change my username or not? And question #2 is do you want EInsiders to provide the obituary information for the many deaths you have listed that have no information provided as we have done for years?

Decline reason:

No. A change in username would still allow you to access and edit with this account. You are free to create a new account, but as you are not the original owner of this account, you will not be unblocked under any circumstance. Smashville^talk 21:02, 25 August 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I don't know how else to put this. I AM the original owner of this account. You are confusing me with Rusty White's account which is a completely different username and password. EInsiders was set up by me only a few days before Wiki originally blocked it. No one else has ever used it. Why don't you think it is MY account?????????????? This is getting silly. Different people with EInsiders.com have set up their own accounts and have posted obituary information and film information but all under their own accounts. This one is the one I set up for ME and only ME. The one I'm asking you to unblock is the one I, Me, Myself, own and set up only for me.

Decline reason:

No response to query below in several days. I'd say one more unblock request, then we forget about this one. — Daniel Case (talk) 14:57, 30 August 2009 (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.

Ok, thanks for clearing that up. You said earlier "I have taken over the EInsiders account from Rusty White" which certainly made the implication that this was not your account. I am willing to unblock you to change username, but I'd like you to agree to follow WP:BESTCOI first, with regards to posting info on EInsiders including links and references. Mango juice^talk 23:45, 26 August 2009 (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).

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

Request reason:

I took over a position from Rusty White and thus have the einsiders account but I also said that Rusty had his own account and had registered under EI that had been used for years. The account I set up has only been in existence for a few weeks so it couldn't have been someone else's account. As far as agreeing to the terms, I take it that you don't want EInsiders to share information like we've done previously with Wiki? Or if we do, we can't site it as our information? If that is what you want me to agree to do, obviously we can't do that.

Decline reason:

Agree with prior admins' reviews. Cirt (talk) 23:46, 3 September 2009 (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.

Accounts are not allowed for organizations. You may have an account here, but it will have to be your account, and not Einsiders. You are free to declare that you work for Einsiders if you want, in fact it's a good idea so that you're up front about your conflict of interest. As for credit there are really two types of credit: credit for encyclopedia work and credit for source material. If anyone uses Einsiders for source material, that ought to be properly credited (source credit), and a link is normally included as a convenience to readers. So Einsiders certainly should get credit for source material it provides, meaning, when Einsiders publishes material that is used as a reference in an article. Credit for encyclopedia contributions (authorship credit) is different -- when any user makes a contribution, the contribution is logged and credited to the user. If you go to any page on Wikipedia and click on "history" you'll see this revision list. That is Wikipedia's way of maintaining its authorship. However, Wikipedia doesn't view those edits as contributions of the author's employer, they view those edits as contributions of the author themselves. Now, the history links to your userpage and if you identify yourself as an Einsiders employee, that is probably the closest Einsiders can get to authorship credit.

From what you're asking I suspect you're talking about crediting Einsiders as a source. The only issue here is that it's inappropriate for you, as a representative of Einsiders, to go adding a lot of credits to Einsiders to articles, because there's the appearance that you might be doing this in order to promote the encyclopedia. So what we would ask is that you refrain from adding lots of citations to Einsiders yourself, but you may certainly suggest any Einsiders source material to independent authors. Mango juice^talk 15:13, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I note that Cirt, the latest reviewing admin, has protected this page so that you can't make further unblock requests. My offer still stands, though: if you are willing to change your username and agree to abide by WP:BESTCOI I will unblock you; just email me the new username you would use and your statement. Mango juice^talk 14:03, 4 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]