User talk:45.3.234.214

Block evasion
Please note that block evasion using IP addresses is prohibited. The appropriate way is to have the block on your account CUfiveo lifted and then edit articles using that account. Thank you.--HamiltonProject (talk) 04:12, 27 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Your message is unclear to me.
 * ( 45.3.234.214 ) is not associated with ( USER: CUfiveo ) 45.3.234.214 (talk) 16:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

June 2020
Anonymous users from this IP address have been blocked from editing for a period of 72 hours for block evasion. If you think there are good reasons for being unblocked, please read the guide to appealing blocks, then add the following text below the block notice on your talk page:. Drmies (talk) 04:15, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
 * If this is a shared IP address and you are an uninvolved editor with a registered account, you may continue to edit by logging in.

August 2022
Hello, I'm BilCat. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions to Talk:Amerigo Vespucci 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. BilCat (talk) 20:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)


 * @BilCat Thank you for providing this information.
 * After briefly reviewing your terms and the terms expressed in the ' soapbox ' article, your reason for reverting this request is inadequate;
 * Advertising, marketing or public relations. 
 * ... Wikipedia articles about a person, company or organization are not an extension of their website, press releases, or other social media marketing efforts. External links to commercial organizations are acceptable if they identify notable organizations which are the topic of the article. Wikipedia neither endorses organizations nor runs affiliate programs. ...
 * External links or Internet directories. 
 * ... There is nothing wrong with adding one or more useful content-relevant links to the external links section of an article; however, excessive lists can dwarf articles and detract from the purpose of Wikipedia. On articles about topics with many fansites, for example, including a link to one major fansite may be appropriate. ...
 * Wikipedia is not a dictionary, or a usage or jargon guide. 
 * A Wikipedia article should not be a complete exposition of all possible details, but a summary of accepted knowledge regarding its subject.
 * Wikipedia is not a place to publish your own thoughts and analyses or to publish new information.
 * Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia.
 * Contributors must disclose any payments they receive for editing Wikipedia.
 * May you please authenticate your reason for reverting the request to add WEBSITE: www.amerigovespucci.com to the article Amerigo Vespucci?
 * I will follow through with your response by notifying wikipedia support to confirm proper action, I am not an attorney. 45.3.234.214 (talk) 15:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Why would we add a link to a parked domain that adds no value to the article?
 * Also, please post new comments at the bottom of the page. Discussions should appear in the correct chronological order. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 16:10, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Exactly. BilCat (talk) 18:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * To elaborate: You added a link to a webpage that is a parked domain that is for sale. You either didn't bother to look at the site before you posted it, didn't understand what it was, or are trying to sell the domain name. In all cases, the link is inappropriate, and should not be on Wikipedia, because it provides no content whatsoever. BilCat (talk) 21:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Please review the website once again. A website is currently under development –
 * The website content is not the responsibility of Wikipedia or volunteers unless the published content replicates Wikipedia directly, at this point it would be deemed invalid and a Wikipedia violation of service or otherwise expressed in written consent.
 * This individual is considered ( dead - or - deceased ) and there are no organizations that claim responsibility for property or value.
 * The domain is a personal domain name that is registered about the topic ( Amerigo Vespucci ) which does not indicate or impede any additional websites or fansites. In the event a domain name forfeits into an expiration, the content may publicly display a for-sale option of lease, rent, finance, or purchase to own. Once again, if the domain is not an interference and it is not a complete replication of Wikipedia the domain name should be available if registered, not removed. To my knowledge, it is not in violation of any terms that are stated by Wikipedia.
 * I am afraid by the term promotional your intention of use does not apply.
 * As this resulted in a discrepancy the terms of this conversation will be sent to Wikipedia for further evaluation. In respect of, the request will be submitted to assure that descriptions that apply to website URLs ( or External Links ) is established with further clarity to prevent mishaps that may occur. I apologize for the misunderstanding and inconvenience. A request has been submitted to add the website URL once again.
 * At this point, it would appear the IP Address has changed to ' 97.76.210.20 ' from the original state of ' 45.3.234.214 ' – 97.76.210.20 (talk) 21:09, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I will no longer be communicating with anyone involved in getting this website added to the Amerigo Vespucci article. Two different editors have already declined your latest request. They can explain why in greater detail if needed. BilCat (talk) 22:49, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * As mentioned, there is ignorance involved with the reason for reverting these multiple attempts to edit. I, personally, refuse to create an account as a result of this action which would have avoided this entire conversation. Notice has been published of the proper resolution, to my knowledge, it is the proper resolution since the objective remains unresolved.
 * Please try to stay on the task of creating an encyclopedia. 45.3.234.214 (talk) 23:16, 31 August 2022 (UTC)
 * If someone had added the link directly to the article, I, or another editor, would have still removed it as inappropriate per WP:ELNO. BilCat (talk) 00:31, 1 September 2022 (UTC)
 * No one is in control of any website. These sites are added as a domain by relevance and volunteers or Wikipedia should not presume responsibility of the content itself at all.
 * This particular website has changed three times since I submitted the initial request, which was related to the topic and was intended for the domain itself. @BilCat if you devote your time auditing all and any of Wikipedia resources give yourself a pat on the back, there's a tool for that. As mentioned, I do not see any content expressed in these articles that would indicate this resource of a deceased person with no affiliated organization, family member, or party to claim rights of property or value is in violation.
 * Answer:
 * 1. NO; ... repeat information ...
 * 2. NO; ... inaccurate material or unverifiable research ...
 * 3. NO; ... malware, malicious scripts, trojan exploits, or content that is illegal to access in the United States ...
 * 4. NO; ... promote { ... Information about companies and products must be written in an objective and unbiased style, free of puffery ... } a website, including online petitions and crowdfunding pages ...
 * 5. NO; ... sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising { ... www.amazon.com ... }
 * 6. NO; ... require payment or registration to view the relevant content ...
 * 7. NO; ... sites that work only with a specific browser or in a specific country ...
 * 8. NO; ... require external applications or plugins to view the content ...
 * 9. NO; ... search results pages ...
 * 10. NO; ... Social networking sites ...
 * 11. NO; ... Blogs, personal web pages and most fansites (negative ones included) ...
 * 12. NO; ... Mirrors or forks of Wikipedia ...
 * 13. NO; ... indirectly related to the article's subject ...
 * 14. NO; ... manufacturers, suppliers, or customers ...
 * 15. NO; ... Sites already linked through Wikipedia sourcing ...
 * 16. NO; ... temporary internet content, where the link is unlikely to remain operable for a useful amount of time ...
 * 17. NO; ... Affiliate, tracking or referral links ...
 * 18. NO; ... disambiguation, redirect and category pages ...
 * 19. NO; ... Websites of organizations mentioned in an article ... 45.3.234.214 (talk) 16:48, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm no longer communicating with you on this issue. Please direct your comments to the article's talk page, and someone else will respond there. BilCat (talk) 18:49, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
 * @BilCat, I would have expected your interest in the tool. 45.3.234.214 (talk) 13:30, 3 September 2022 (UTC)
 * See below. BilCat (talk) 23:07, 3 September 2022 (UTC)

Final warning
If you continue to add to articles URLs of placeholder Web sites, as you did most recently at Oscar Niemeyer, and URLs that redirect to commercial sites, as you did at Dante Alighieri, I will certainly block you for disruptive editing. Deor (talk) 17:42, 3 September 2022 (UTC)


 * You have no reason to block this user from contributing relevant domain names. Just to presume authority?! Focus on the progression and development of these web pages. If the domain matches the content or unless Wikipedia registered volunteers publish concrete evidence that would suggest the user is in violation for publishing non-malicious domain names, leave it alone. That is why terms need to be clarified by Wikipedia first and foremost. If anything this is a breakthrough than a disruption. Ignorance prevails. 97.76.210.20 belongs to the Public Library System of the State of Florida and was blocked likely a result of this conversation. 97.76.210.20 (talk) 00:46, 7 September 2022 (UTC)