User talk:Digerateur

Welcome!

Hello, Digerateur, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

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 need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} after the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Baristarim 23:48, 1 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

If you have a close connection to some of the people, places or things you have written about on Wikipedia, you may have a conflict of interest. In keeping with Wikipedia's neutral point of view policy, edits where there is a conflict of interest, or where such a conflict might reasonably be inferred from the tone of the edit and the proximity of the editor to the subject, are strongly discouraged. If you have a conflict of interest, you should avoid or exercise great caution when:

editing articles related to you, your organization, or its competitors, as well as projects and products they are involved with,
participating in deletion discussions about articles related to your organization or its competitors,
linking to the Wikipedia article or website of your organization in other articles (see Wikipedia:Spam);
and you must always:
avoid breaching relevant policies and guidelines, especially neutral point of view, attribution, and autobiography.

For more details, please read the Conflict of Interest guideline. Thank you. Jehochman (^Talk/_Contrib) 00:27, 8 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

November 2008[edit]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to contribute constructively to the encyclopedia, one or more of the external links you added do not comply with our guidelines for external links and have been removed. Wikipedia is not a collection of links; nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Since Wikipedia uses nofollow tags, external links do not alter search engine rankings. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page before reinserting it. Please take a look at the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Kanonkas : Talk 20:13, 2 November 2008 (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).

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

Request reason:

I am not a spammer. Please block editors who inappropriately block contributors from contributing.

Decline reason:

The vast majority of your edits have consisted entirely and solely of adding external links to your blog from Wikipedia articles. This is not allowed. If you wish to be unblocked, you need to convince us adminsitrators that you intend to stop this behavior entirely and completely. Jayron32 05:51, 17 June 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Oops. My mistake. The policy was in the external links document: "The subject of this guideline is external links that are not citations to sources supporting article content. If the website or page to which you want to link includes information that is not yet a part of the article, consider using it as a source for the article, and citing it" I did not realize that. I will comply with this.

Decline reason:

And you were first notified of that policy 2 years ago, yet you keep coming back and doing the same thing. You're clearly not going to change. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 22:01, 6 July 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

Not true. I genuinely did not understand that external links were only meant to be used for content that was directly referenced in the article. I thought that any material that was related to the article was allowed. Nevertheless, I accept responsibility for not reading the guidelines carefully. If you choose not to believe me, there is nothing I can do.

Please include a decline or accept reason.

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.

{{Unblock on hold|1=YellowMonkey|2=Please unblock me. I now currently understand the policy and will not violate it. Your assumption that because I did not follow it two years ago I am clearly not going to change is incorrect. Please understand that some of us only endeavor to edit pages *rarely*. It is possible that we may be able to contribute more frequently to this community, but you are shutting people out by making assumptions about their motives which are untrue.|3=Beeblebrox (talk) 00:43, 16 August 2010 (UTC)}}[reply]

Your request to be unblocked has been granted for the following reason(s):

After reviewing your request and speaking with the blocking admin I have decided to assume your good faith and unblock you. However, as you have already been blocked for spamming be aware that a single recurrence could lead to this block being speedily re-instated. Welcome back.

Request handled by: Beeblebrox (talk)

Unblocking administrator: Please check for active autoblocks on this user after accepting the unblock request.