User talk:Eddstonham

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia.

Getting started
Make a short userpage! Everyone's wary of a redlink. Edit your preferences to verify your email and set up email alerts, say for when someone leaves you new talkpage messages.
Helpful links
Editing || Writing a great article || Naming and Merging || Style Manual
Policies || What Wikipedia is not
Maintenance
Deleting articles || all maintenance tasks (see also open tasks, below)

Uploading images: please note the origins and copyright status of every image you upload. 

To sign your comments, type four tildes like this:  ~~~~. 
This automatically adds your name and the current time.

I hope you enjoy being a Wikipedian on en:. You can also leave questions on my talk page. :)

Regards, +sj+


You can help improve the articles listed below! This list updates frequently, so check back here for more tasks to try. (See Wikipedia:Maintenance or the Task Center for further information.)

Help counter systemic bias by creating new articles on important women.

Help improve popular pages, especially those of low quality.


Speedy deletion nomination of Cambridge time traveller[edit]

A tag has been placed on Cambridge time traveller, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, product, group, service or person and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become an encyclopedia article. Please read the guidelines on spam as well as Wikipedia:FAQ/Business for more information. You may also wish to consider using a Wizard to help you create articles - see the Article Wizard.

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. Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 01:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure what the issue is give me some pointers --Eddstonham (talk) 00:07, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The article you've created is no different from unambiguous advertising, please note that Wikipedia is not a medium for you to advertise your company/organization/group, we reserved the right to BLACKLIST your website if you continue to do so. --Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 02:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Edd, as far as I can tell the issue is that to have its own article a group needs to be able to show its notability. Public news reports about the group's work, external publications noting the size and scope of its membership and activity, or its longevity, and any other citations (preferably to a source other than the organization's own website) all help establish notability.
Because a lot of people try to use Wikipedia as a way to prop up their own small business, the new-page patrollers here are very sensitive to articles that might be advertising for a non-notable commercial group. –SJ+ 07:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Ok, I see the point however we are not trying to advertise...we are happy to remove the page and get some clarification on a new page later. Eddstonham (talk) 18:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't you get blocked? ChaosControl1994 (talk) 18:02, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

yes why did I get blocked and what for I don't know.. this Wikipedia is not very good and I feel it is starting to waste my time, all I want to do is add details about a history group like others have. anyway I don't know now how to get unblocked Eddstonham (talk) 18:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Use {{unblock|your reason here}}. ChaosControl1994 (talk) 18:13, 7 March 2010 (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).

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

Request reason:

I was not using two accounts, I did decide to register after doing some edits. I only have one account, If it was the article I wrot also I did not intent to advertise I was trying to write about the history group I help run like some others have done about the history societies they also run an email would have been helpful to explain what the issue was. Directly blocking people without using decent english to explain why a block has been done would be great.

Decline reason:

This does not account for your WP:SOCK, User Eddstonham (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log).  Sandstein  18:58, 7 March 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).

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

Request reason:

didn't WP:SOCK I dont have two accounts and in fact I registered by the time I had wrtten the Article., you are picking on me as if I have broken the law or something.. let me know in plain english the article is ok but you are saying I posted with two accounts I don't have two accounts I only have 1 account with 1 machine I only registered last night am thinking WHY BOTHER...the site looks cool however if we cannot even add stuff then it does not forefill the task in question, and I will withdrawl my attention to the site

Decline reason:

You clearly have two accounts: User:Eddstonham and User:User Eddstonham. You have even edited each other's talkpage, so you are aware of this fact. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:05, 7 March 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.

March 2010[edit]

This is the final warning you will receive for your disruptive edits.
The next time you use Wikipedia for advertising, as you did with Cambridge time traveller, you will be blocked from editing. Dave ♠♣♥♦1185♪♫™ 01:54, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Looking at the article in question, I don't think there was any advertising involved. The Time Traveller Group probably doesn't meet our current notability standards, but it is a local historical society, which is a well-establisehed topic for Wikipedia articles. Edd, I hope you will feel free to continue contributing information related to Cambridgeshire!
For a few examples of notable institutions, see Oxfordshire Architectural and Historical Society (OAHS) and Category:Organisations_based_in_Cambridge.
–SJ+ 07:09, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I am a little fed up and may withdrawl from Wikipedia... I thank you for your comments about over history groups and am glad you saw my point however I feel some users had it in for me and now my account looks as if I cannot do anything anyway.

If another history group is allowed to post an article why can't I

MfD nomination of User:Eddstonham/Cambridge Time Traveller Group[edit]

User:Eddstonham/Cambridge Time Traveller Group, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/User:Eddstonham/Cambridge Time Traveller Group and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of User:Eddstonham/Cambridge Time Traveller Group during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you.  Sandstein  19:00, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WHAT A WASTE OF TIME WIKIPEDIA IS...ADMINS THAT HAVE A PROBLEM WITH PAGES THAT DONT ADVERTISE...

STICK THE SITE I CANNOT BE BOTHERED IF YOU DONT WANT GROUP INFORMATION OF INFORMATION THAT WOULD BE OF INTEREST WHY EVEN HAVE A SITE Eddstonham (talk) 19:04, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your shouting in Caps alone is a valid reason to leave you blocked. All pages on Wikipedia belong to Wikipedia - an article (even in userspace) that is clearly not-notable and clearly exists to promote some organization (especially one that is non-notable) has to go. Repeated recreated of the same article is considered to be disruption.
So, how do you get unblocked? Clearly, the evidence of 2 accounts (WP:SOCK) is available. This may have been an accident, but you have indeed edited using both - give one up permanently, and stop trying to claim otherwise. Secondly, stop this nonsense about recreating this non-notable page. Thirdly, read the main policies of Wikipedia. Once you have done that (and re-read the guide to unblock requests), you can then rethink your entire series of actions on Wikipedia, and hopefully you will convince this community to unblock you. (talk→ BWilkins ←track) 20:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]


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

Your suggestion to model new pages on old established ones is not a bad idea - but there is no guarantee that the page you pick is suitable (it may have just been missed by the patrollers), so pick carefully. One thing I notice is that the word "We" appears in your draft document - this gives away that you probably are personally involved with this organisation - while it is allowed for you to edit such an article, it is greatly discouraged as you have a conflict of interest, and therefore it is extremely hard for you to write such an article with a neutral point of view. I urge you to leave writing Articles in which you have such a link, to other editors - suggest you use Articles for creation, where you can submit the data, and a independent editor will write the article. If your edit any Article you edit where you have a conflict of interest, then you should always declare yourself as such on the talk page - openness will always be respected. I am willing to accept good faith in that you made the other account by mistake (by including the "User" word, note: you don't need to register an e-mail to create an account, although it's better if you do - that's why the other account has no mail address associated with it), so this at this time I will unblock. The other account User:User Eddstonham will stay blocked indefinitely. I will also add a more comprehensive welcome template at the end, with useful links to policies. Please be careful with future edits, another block will be much harder to remove.

Request handled by:  Ronhjones  (Talk)


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

Eddstonham (talk) 21:47, 7 March 2010 (UTC) Thank you for your help, I will take note of your suggestions and read all the data you have pointed me too.[reply]

Eddstonham (talk) 23:31, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome[edit]

Hello, Eddstonham! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contribution. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing!  Ronhjones  (Talk) 22:52, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Getting Started
Getting Help
Policies and Guidelines
The Community
Things to do
Miscellaneous

User:Eddstonham/Cambridge Time Traveller Group[edit]

The result of the deletion discussion was to let you keep the page in user space for development. Your main problem is going to be to demonstrate Notability, a requirement to have a Wikipedia article, which is not a matter of opinion but needs to be established by showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." Significant means more than just listing-type mentions; reliable excludes Myspace, blogs, places where anyone can post anything; independent excludes the subject's own website, affiliated ones and press releases. The point is that Wikipedia does not have articles about anything or anyone, and we don't ourselves make judgements about what is interesting or important: the test is, have other people, independent of the subject, found it interesting and important enough to write about?

That's a difficult test for a new organisation to pass, and it may be that your group will not be able to qualify for some time. At the moment, the first four links in your article don't actually mention the group at all.

There is more advice about notability in WP:Notability (organizations and companies), and good general advice about writing Wikipedia articles in WP:Your first article. If you are yourself connected with the group, you should also read WP:BESTCOI. Regards, JohnCD (talk) 21:34, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Eddstonham&oldid=1143538611"