User talk:Sophiepluck

May 2019[edit]

Hello, I'm Kleuske. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to OMD Worldwide have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. Kleuske (talk) 09:36, 29 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

June 2019[edit]

Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to add promotional or advertising material to Wikipedia, as you did at OMD Worldwide, you may be blocked from editing. Theroadislong (talk) 09:26, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Sophiepluck. The nature of your edits gives the impression you have an undisclosed financial stake in promoting a topic, such as the edit you made to OMD Worldwide, but you have not complied with Wikipedia's mandatory paid editing disclosure requirements. Paid advocacy is a category of conflict of interest (COI) editing that involves being compensated by a person, group, company or organization to use Wikipedia to promote their interests. Undisclosed paid advocacy is prohibited by our policies on neutral point of view and what Wikipedia is not, and is an especially egregious type of COI; the Wikimedia Foundation regards it as a "black hat" practice akin to black-hat SEO.

Paid advocates are very strongly discouraged from direct article editing, and should instead propose changes on the talk page of the article in question if an article exists, and if it does not, from attempting to write an article at all. At best, any proposed article creation should be submitted through the articles for creation process, rather than directly.

Regardless, if you are receiving or expect to receive compensation for your edits, broadly construed, you are required by the Wikimedia Terms of Use to disclose your employer, client and affiliation. You can post such a mandatory disclosure to your user page at User:Sophiepluck. The template {{Paid}} can be used for this purpose – e.g. in the form: {{paid|user=Sophiepluck|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. If I am mistaken – you are not being directly or indirectly compensated for your edits – please state that in response to this message. Otherwise, please provide the required disclosure. In either case, do not edit further until you answer this message. So Why 09:45, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This is SophiePluck. I am not being directly or indirectly compensated for my edits. The page belongs to the company I work for and the management have asked that it be shut down. The page I'm referring to is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OMD_Worldwide

The page does NOT belong to the company and Wikipedia has no interest in their request for it to be shut down. Theroadislong (talk) 14:15, 26 July 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).

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

Request reason:

I have been falsely accused of disruptive editing

Decline reason:

Clear violation of WP:COI. I also believe you have been violating WP:PROMO. Yamla (talk) 16:07, 26 July 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.

In order for a proper review of the block, please ensure you disclose your relationship with OMD Worldwide.-- Jezebel's Ponyo^{bons mots} 16:06, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]