User talk:2Saurus

CS1 error on Saur (company)
Hello, I'm Qwerfjkl (bot). I have automatically detected that this edit performed by you, on the page Saur (company), may have introduced referencing errors. They are as follows: Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?action=edit&preload=User:Qwerfjkl/sandbox/43&editintro=User:Qwerfjkl/boteditintro&minor=&title=User_talk:Qwerfjkl&preloadtitle=Qwerfjkl%20(bot)%20–%202Saurus&section=new&preloadparams%5b%5d=&preloadparams%5b%5d=1166245035 report it to my operator]. Thanks, Qwerfjkl (bot) (talk) 08:56, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
 * A "bare URL and missing title" error. References show this error when they do not have a title. Please edit the article to add the appropriate title parameter to the reference. ([//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Saur_(company)&action=edit&minor=minor&summary=Fixing+reference+error+raised+by+%5B%5BUser%3AQwerfjkl%20(bot)%7CQwerfjkl%20(bot)%5D%5D Fix] | [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&preload=User:Qwerfjkl%20(bot)/helpform&preloadtitle=Referencing%20errors%20on%20%5B%5BSpecial%3ADiff%2F1166245035%7CSaur%20(company)%5D%5D Ask for help])

July 2023
 Your account has been indefinitely blocked from editing because your account has been used for advertising or promotion, which is contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. Also, your username indicates that the account represents a business, organisation, group, or web site, which is against the username policy.

If you intend to make useful contributions instead of promoting your business or organization, you may request unblock and a username change. In your reasons, you must: To do this, post the text  at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your proposed new username" with your new username and replace the text "Your reason here" with your reasons to be unblocked.
 * Disclose any compensation you may receive for your contributions in accordance with the paid-contribution disclosure requirement.
 * Convince us that you understand the reason for your block and that you will not repeat the kind of edits for which you were blocked.
 * Describe in general terms the contributions that you intend to make if you are unblocked.
 * Provide a new username.

Please note that the new username you choose cannot already be taken and in use by another account. You can go here to search and see if the username you'd like to choose is available. If the search returns that no global account with that username exists, that means it is available to be taken.

Appeals: If, after reviewing the guide to appealing blocks, you believe this block was made in error, you may appeal it by adding the text  at the bottom of your talk page. Replace the text "Your reason here" with the reasons you believe the block was an error, and publish the page. UtherSRG (talk) 11:01, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

Additional notes for 2Saurus, not a live appeal review Hi 2Saurus, thought I would answer your questions as best I can. By all means amend your appeal afterwards if you wish, or just append additional comments directly below your appeal.
 * 1) I think you have mistaken our general COI rules with our "paid COI" rules - your phrasing in your edits (and their summaries) suggests that you have a link to the company like being any employee. For the disclosure this only requires a small tweak to note a paid coi. The differences is that it's a much more absolute prohibition against editing the article directly, rather than making edit requests. I'm satisfied that you certainly weren't trying to avoid the disclosure differences, but weren't aware of the difference.
 * 2) Your edits were viewed as promotional not because they were using blatantly promotional language, but beause they're adding positive content that is a) quite possibly not needed in the article b) cited to either the company's own websites or to company press releases in other publications (which is functionally the same content and the set of problems regarding reliability and independence). The company's website is probably fine for updating things like the employee count and annual revenue, but not much beyond that category of detail. Nosebagbear (talk) 08:37, 4 August 2023 (UTC)

If people choose to edit dishonestly(choosing to not admit that they are paid) and against our policies, that is up to them. They might get away with it for awhile, but are usually found out eventually. The community had considered the disincentive argument when implementing the disclosure requirement(which did not always exist) as well as banning paid editing totally and felt that requiring disclosure was a good balance. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 31 August 2023 (UTC)