User talk:Vidiby

Welcome![edit]

Hello, Vidiby, 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, such as Vidiby.com, may not conform to some of Wikipedia's guidelines, and may not be retained.

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, followed by your question, 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:Questions or ask me on my talk page. Again, welcome! Valenciano (talk) 06:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Vidiby.com[edit]

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.
You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Vidiby.com 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 web content, 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 read more about what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, and you wish to retrieve the deleted material for future reference or improvement, you can place a request here. Valenciano (talk) 06:07, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Vidiby.com[edit]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thanks for taking the time to contribute.

I'm a bot designed by another Wikipedia editor, and I'm here to help you with our deletion process. I noticed that while working on an article recently, you removed a speedy deletion template that tagged it for deletion. Don't get discouraged! Deletion discussions happen on Wikipedia all the time.

If you don't want the article to get deleted, please click here.

The link will take you to the talk page, where you can explain why the article should be kept. If you have any questions about this or need help with editing, you can ask at the Help desk.

We really hope you'll stick around to help make Wikipedia better! Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 06:35, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This page should not be speedy deleted because...[edit]

This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because it describes what vidiby is, including it's mission as described on its official website, and its history as well as its naming origin. It shouldn't be deleted just because it isn't as well-known as websites such as Amazon or Net-a-porter (which both also have wikipedia pages). It should be on Wikipedia for people who are interested in finding out more about Vidiby.com. Vidiby (talk) 07:03, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome to Wikipedia. Because we have a policy against usernames that give the impression that the account represents a group, organization or website, I have blocked this account; please take a moment to create a new account with a username that represents only yourself as an individual and which complies with our username policy. You should also read our conflict of interest guideline and be aware that promotional editing is not acceptable regardless of the username you choose.

If your username does not represent a group, organization or website, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice.

You may simply create a new account, but you may prefer to change your username to one that complies with our username policy, so that your past contributions are associated with your new username. If you would prefer to change your username, you may appeal this username block by adding the text {{unblock-un|new username|reason=Your reason here ~~~~}} below this notice. Thank you.

--kelapstick^(bainuu) 07:37, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unblock Appeal[edit]

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).

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

Request reason:

Citing Wikipedia's rules: Self-promotion includes the requirement to maintain a neutral point of view (Vidiby.com article was written with a neutral point of view, no promotional and/or boastful languages were used. It was also written objectively which included its history and naming origin. It was created solely for informational purposes.) Advertising - Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery (again, the article Vidiby.com was written in an objective and unbiased style, which included establishment date, mission, naming origin, and others. No promotional/marketing languages were used.

Decline reason:

This ublock request has nothing to do with the username block (which has been addressed by the user below) kelapstick^(bainuu) 08:00, 10 July 2013 (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.

Unblock - New Username[edit]

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.

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

Requested username:

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

Request reason:

I've requested for the unblock and attached the reasoning citing Wikipedia's rules above. As for the new username, I'm requesting for "loveforstartups" as the new username to comply with Wikipedia's username policy Vidiby (talk) 07:19, 10 July 2013 (UTC)

Decline reason:

Although you state you're already creating a new username, Here are a few key questions:

Do you understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and not a business directory?
Do you understand conflict of interest?
Do you understand that to be considered for an encyclopedia article, the subject must be notable?

You are currently blocked because your username appears directly related to a company, group or product that you have been promoting, contrary to the username policy. Changing the username will not allow you to violate the 3 important principles above. (✉→BWilkins←✎) 11:05, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Bwilkins, please refer to the on-going conversation between Kelastick & I below. I do believe I present some fair points and examples of existing Wikipedia pages.Vidiby (talk) 11:11, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Reply to: Hi Vidiby, I agree the page vidivy.com was not particularly boastful...[edit]

Hi Kelapstick (User:Kelapstick), I've cited the Wikipedia rules in terms of "self-promotion" & "advertising". I've also requested for a username change based on the "blocking reason" you've provided. To reply to your comment:

"Hi Vidiby, I agree the page vidivy.com was not particularly boastful, you are correct. But it also didn't explain why it was important, which is why it was deleted. You say in your deletion contesting that it is not well known. Net-a-Porter is sourced from one the Telegraph and Bloomberg, and while the article needs work, those do show that they it is a notable subject. Cheers, --kelapstick(bainuu) 07:18, 10 July 2013 (UTC)"

Importance of an article is like love, it's in the eye of beholder. There is no quantitative measuring method for "importance". Informational wikipedia pages exist solely for the purpose of letting people read about topics they desire, and covering such a wide-range of topics is one of the biggest reasons why wikipedia outpaced traditional encyclopedias in terms of popularity and access. If articles of "no importance" as you determined were indeed removed, wikipedia would not be here in the first place. The existence of the page "Vidiby.com" was for that purpose only, information. If 1 of the billions of internet users out there decide to look up "vidiby.com" on wikipedia, it's there to inform them of the history, origin, mission, language and context of vidiby.com. Presence alone, is of importance. The article was written in an unbiased style, with no boastful or promotional languages used. I ask that you change my username (as requested above), and undelete the "Vidiby.com" article for the reasons above. If for some unstated reasons or policies that you cannot do that as an admin, I will write a complaint to Wikipedia about this, and I do ask you to provide me with a way to back up the original "Vidiby.com" to my local hard-drive for archive purposes. Also, I'm a Canadian as well (hope that adds some points too).Vidiby (talk) 07:52, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Vidiby, you should just be able to create a new username on your own (unless I have messed up the settings). The block for username is per our username policy, specifically Usernames that unambiguously consist of a name of a company, group, institution or product. As for the article, all it stated was basic information about the website, not why it is noteworthy enough to be included in Wikipedia. Wikipedia does not have articles about everything, we only have articles on things that are notable. You should also read our conflict of interest guidelines, regarding writing articles about subjects that you are associated with. --kelapstick^(bainuu) 07:55, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kelapstick, I'll go ahead and create another account with a username that follows the username policy as stated by Wikipedia. As for the article, even basic information is information. I read through the COI guidelines, and found no rules against articles such as "Vidiby.com". It wasn't used as a promotional tool, nor was that the intent. It's solely for netizens who decide to look it up on Wikipedia. It's not a "covert advertisement" either, because the article was not selling anything to anybody. It's stating facts about the website. If you look up things like "Snapchat", "Vine" or even "Dailymotion", they're references are also mere adding "facts" to the identity of those topics. Another good example is the the wikipedia page on "people". It literally just give the definition of the word "people", and some examples of it being used. More examples? Look up "Benitagla" on wikipedia. It has no references, and has very basic information. You can also look up "Jinnah of Pakistan" on Wikipedia. It has one line, no references. How do they pass the notability test? There's a start to every topic, and references are added as time progresses collaboratively. It's evident by Wikipedia labeling these articles as "stubs" and asking for contribution help to grow the article into something more substantial. If you thwart the growth of an article right away, how will it ever become increasingly informative? For these reasons, I really do believe it's fair to have "Vidiby.com" on Wikipedia for netizens who are interested in learning more about it.Vidiby (talk) 08:39, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]