User talk:MegMaker

December 2011[edit]

Please do not add inappropriate external links to Wikipedia, as you did to AI@50. Wikipedia is not a collection of links, nor should it be used for advertising or promotion. Inappropriate links include (but are not limited to) links to personal web sites, links to web sites with which you are affiliated, and links that attract visitors to a web site or promote a product. See the external links guideline and spam guideline for further explanations. Because Wikipedia uses the nofollow attribute value, its external links are disregarded by most search engines. If you feel the link should be added to the article, please discuss it on the article's talk page rather than re-adding it. Thank you. Alexf^(talk) 15:28, 27 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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?

You are still welcome to write about something other than your company, organization, or clients. If you do intend to make useful contributions on 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.

--Orange Mike | Talk 21:07, 27 December 2011 (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.

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

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

I was editing links that were made by someone else that point to my site. My site URL changed and I needed to update the article links.

Decline reason:

Username change isn't needed. Max Semenik (talk) 06:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

This user's unblock request has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

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

Request reason:

Specifically, I was the sole reporter onsite at the AI@50 conference and blogged about the conference at my site, which at the time was called engagingexperience.com. Someone *other than me* years ago added links to my blog posts to the AI@50 article on Wikipedia. In the last few days I changed the domain name of my site to megmaker.com, not engagingexperience.com, and so I edited the URLs to that the links to my posts would not break. Mine is a non-commercial site. I do not post advertising and draw no revenue from it. I get steady traffic to my site from the Wikipedia article AI@50 and request to be unblocked. I was editing these links in good faith as a service to the article's users. I should also note that I'm a strong supporter of Wikipedia and donate to it each year. I am NOT a spammer and if it violates the Wikipedia policies, you can simply remove the links from the AI@50 site. Meg (talk) 04:03, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Accept reason:

Hi, sorry - looks like we've overreacted, but try to see it our way: someone replaces links with links to the site that matches their username, looks like spam. Of course it's not a problem if your username matches your personal site's name as it's your real name, too. Note that this situation could have been avoided completely, had you explained why you're changing the links in the first place - we use edit summaries to explain our edits. Max Semenik (talk) 06:21, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Max Semenik (talk). I'll use Edit Summaries in the future. My best, Meg (talk) 15:22, 30 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I originated article and added these very useful links many, many years ago. I saw no mention of this misunderstanding on article Talk page and just now wondered what happened to these links. Talk page commented and edited links restored. Any further discussion on Talk:AI@50 page, please. Thanks all around. -- Paulscrawl (talk) 01:44, 10 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]